A TELEDYNE ENQINEERlNQ SERVICES ATTACHMENT 1 TO TES LETTER 5511-495 The r'evision pages transmitted by this letter reflect changes in IDVP completion status through Wednesday, August 17, 1983. Additional ITRs have been issued and EOI actions taken on August 17-18th which are sumarized by this attachment. 1. ITRs Issued: ITR-59, Corrective Action - Stress in Large Bore Piping. ITR-60, Corrective Action - Large and Small Bore Piping. ITR-63, Corrective Action - HVAC Ducts, Raceways, Instrument Tubing, and Supports. 2. EOI File Actions: 983: Closed with issuance of ITR-63, Revision 0. 1143: Opened to identify that excessive loads exist on an HVAC support anchor bolt;. 3009: Opened to identify a potential concern regarding the containment interior structure horizontal design response spectra. 3. Based on the actions identified above, Table 7.4-1 has been updated as indicated by the next two attached pages. 4.. The remaining pages of this attachment have been provided by the DCP to update the information included in Section 7.3 of the IDVP Final Report. 8308260i28 8308i9 PDR ADOCK 05000575i R PDR '
Transcript
A TELEDYNEENQINEERlNQ SERVICES
ATTACHMENT 1 TO TES LETTER 5511-495
The r'evision pages transmitted by this letter reflect changes inIDVP completion status through Wednesday, August 17, 1983. AdditionalITRs have been issued and EOI actions taken on August 17-18th which aresumarized by this attachment.
1. ITRs Issued:
ITR-59, Corrective Action - Stress in Large Bore Piping.ITR-60, Corrective Action - Large and Small Bore Piping.ITR-63, Corrective Action - HVAC Ducts, Raceways, InstrumentTubing, and Supports.
2. EOI File Actions:
983: Closed with issuance of ITR-63, Revision 0.
1143: Opened to identify that excessive loads exist on an HVAC
support anchor bolt;.
3009: Opened to identify a potential concern regarding thecontainment interior structure horizontal design response spectra.
3. Based on the actions identified above, Table 7.4-1 has been updatedas indicated by the next two attached pages.
4.. The remaining pages of this attachment have been provided by the DCP
to update the information included in Section 7.3 of the IDVP FinalReport.
8308260i28 8308i9PDR ADOCK 05000575iR PDR '
C
W ~
TABLE 7.4-1
A TELEDYNEENQLNEERlNQ SERVlCES
STATUS OF INCOMPLETE VERIFICATIONS DEFINED BY ITRs-8 ANO -35AS OF AUGUST 19, 1983
IOVP PGandE
Re ort SubsectionsUnresolved ITR
EOIs No.*Verification Com lete2Field Desicen Mod
4.4.2.2
4.4.3
4 ' '
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.1
1097
1092
1014. 3009
55
57-1
Yes No NA
NA Yes No
54 NA No No
4.4.5
4.4.6
4.4.8
2.1.1.4.3
2.1.5
2.1.4
1014
10261028
51 Yes
58-1 Yes
56 Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
4.5.2.3b " 2.2.3
4.5.3.2a 2.2.2
4.5.3.2b 2.2.2
4.5.2.3a 2.2.1 938109811381141
1098
10981141
10981142
59-1 Yes
60-1 Yes
61 Yes
60-1 Yes
Part
Part
Part
Part
No
No
No
4.6.2.2
4.6.3
4.6.4
4.6.5
2.3.1
2.3.1
2.3.1'.3.1
67-1 NA '-
67-1 NA
67-1 Yes
67-1 Yes
Yes
Par tPart
Part
NA
NA
*When the ITR number is followed by another number, the ITR has beenissued but a further revision is expected.
1 of 2
<~a '
r
TABLE 7.4-1 (Cont)
)> TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
PGandEIDVP
Re ort Subsections UnresolvedEOIs
Verification Com lete7No.* 'ield ~Desi n Mod
'4.6.6.3
4.6.6.5
2.3.3
2.5 1134'143
67-1 Yes . Yes . NA
631 No 'Part Nos
4.6.7
4.6.8.1b
2.3.2
2.4
~ 4,.9.1.4
4.9.2
4.9.3,
2.3.2.3.3
4.6.8.2b 2.6
4.6.9 NA
NA
67-1 Yes
63-1 Yes
63-1 Yes
67-1 Yes
67-1 NA
68 Yes
65 No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes NA
Yes NA
No 'ANo No
*When the ITR number is followed by another number, the ITR has been. issued but .a 'further revision is expected.
2of2
~ '
DIABLO CANYON PROJECT
PHASE I STATUS
August 12, 1983 Update
6290'78
SUMMARY
'n the following we are provided a listing of the status'f our Phase I work.We have presented below'the scope of the DCP CAP as defined in the Phase I .
Final Report. 'his is an update of the Ju'ly 26; 1983 transmittal,DCVP-TES-1271.
This summary is divided into 3 sections, providing a status of the work. forPhase I.
Section 1.. Civil/Structural Work
Section 2. Piping and Pipe Supports Design Review
Section 3.'quipment Seismic Design Review
For each 'section:some 'of the information is presented in tables.. The status.of all information is in terms of the percent of the work that is complete.
'here no percentage are shown, no DCP activity has occurred. Complete back-upinformation is available in the Phase I Final Report.
~ August 12, 19830040D/0116P
'I
I'
SECTION 1. CIVIL/STRUCTURE WORK'290 i8
The status of the Cfvfl/Structural work is summarized below. Details on the
status of this work ar'e presented fn Table 1.1 which includes important
information contained fn the footnotes to this table. For details on this
work, please see applfcable sections of the Phase I Final Report.
August 12,, 1983AAAOn/61160 "
2»
0Table 1 1
OIABLO CANYON PROJECT
Areaec on escr p on
Oesi n ReviewNe o - a c. or
Criteria ology AnalysesReviewed Reviewed Reviewed
PHASE I CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAN STATUS
CIVIL STRUCTURAL
Oesi n Revision or Reanal sisil)r er a ar e
and NethodologyEstablished
Nodificationss-
OCNs Const.Bu'ssuedCompl. Ce
OCNs
Compl.
2..1 .1 Containmentand internals(>)
OCN NethodologyEstablished
Cele�.
Cal c. Cele.Pre . Check. A r.
2.1.1.3.2.1 Horizontalmodel ofcontainmentfor OE and ODE
~Additions l OCNs.vereissued as a"result ofcrlter1a :hanges.
August l2, 198300400/0086P.
A
AreaSection Description
Desi n RevtevHethod- Ca c. or
Criteria ology AnalysesRevt~d Reviewed Reviewed
.Table 1.1
DIABLO CANYON PROJECT
PHASE I CORRECTIVE ACTION. PROGRAH STATUSCIVIL STRUCTURAL
Desi n Revision or Regnal stsr 1)
Cr1ter1a C ar1f ted. and HethodologyEstablished
Hod1ftcattonsAs-
DCHs Const. Built DCHs
Issued Compt. Compl. Compl.OCH Hethodology
EstablishedCalc. Cele. Cele.Pre . Check. A r.
2.5.2.2
2.5.2.3
2.5.3
2.5.3.1
2.5.3.2
2.5.3.3
~ 2.5.4
2.5.4.1
2.5.4.2
'oadingcombinations(2>)
Acceptancecr1teria
Hethodology
Descriptionof ducts andsupports
Genericqualification
Spec1f tcqual 1 f1catton
Design revter
Evaluat1on tocriteria(2B)
Oescrtpt1onof modtf1ca-ttons<20)
'00100
100
100
100
100 100 75
100 95'
0
Notes:
2.
Th1s includes hark required to make calculattons conststent with as bu1lt as a result of other changes or to correct er rors.
Scope of revter 1s established.- The design crtter1a for the dome service crane 1s 1n the f1nal s1gn-off process. Platform dibe1ng rev1sed to address add1t1onal non-se1sm1c related loadings.
3. Soll behav1or for.DE/DOE cond1t1ons 1s st111 be1ng reviewed.
4. Calculations for interface bebreen 1nternals and base mat are being finalized.
5. Calculations for guide struts and rail capacity btth comparison to se1sm1c demand are being completed.
August 12, 190300400/0086P
-12-
P
A,
Jl
"\
.Hotes: 6. An analysis to evaluate structural 1ntegrity is, 1n progress.
7. Calculations evaluating the effect of pipe hanger loads on restra1nts are 1n progress.
8. final p1p1ng and other, loads are be1ng reevaluated.
9 ~ Scope of review for OE/DOE condit1ons 1s being evaluated as scope for other cond1t1ons 1s establ1shed. Design allowables and proci-lures for'on-seism1cloads are be1ng evaluated.
. lo.
12. Control room slab and other addit1onal.data po1nts are in the rev1ew or approval process.
Horizontal diaphragm calculat1ons are be1ng rev1ewed.'he vertical slab calculations are approved. The OE/ODE evaluation 1s 1n progress.
14. Scope is establ1shed.
15. Un1t 1 is lOOX complete 1n construction, and Unit 2 construct1on 1s about.5(g complete. As-built of Unit 1 1s 95K complete.
16. Scope 1s be1ng evaluated.
ll. Scope is established. Open items consist of ~l) review of requirements-associated w1th high energy 11ne break, and (2) signoff of cr1ter1a forturbine building crane. Evaluation of structural steel beams is in progress.
18. Scope 1s establ1shed.
lg. As-bu1lts for vent nut modificat1ons have been rece1ved and are be1ng reviewed. As-bu1lts for f1llets have not been rece1ved.
20. Scope of revfew 1s establ1shed.
21. Scope of review 1s established.
22. Scope of review 1s establ1shed.
23. Tests are 1n progress to confirm design'alues used for conduit clamps and back-to-back Superstrut welding.
24 ~ "ocation summary for each support 1s complete for Un1t l. Add1tions due to new 1nstallat1ons are be1ng received on an ongo1ng ba:1s:
25. Revised response spectra are being rece1ved and rev1ew 1s 1n progress. Addlt1onal modif1cat1ons may result.
26. Scope of review is establ1shed.
21. Rev1ew of requirements assoc1ated with high energy 11ne break phenomenon is in progress.
28. Add1t1onal support des1gn associated with HVAC system changes 1s 1n progress. Rev1sed response spectra are be1ng rece1ved and review 1s inprogress. Add1tional modifications may result.
29. No construction 1s requ1red.
30. OE/DOE so11 structure 1nteraction loads are be1ng evaluated.
3l. Supplemental report 1s required to account for the OE/OOE soll structure 1nteract1on.
August '12, 198300400/6086 P
-13-
e'"
4 '
SECTION 2. PIPING AND PIPE SUPPORTS, DESIGN REVIEW
2.1 ~Lg 21
. General - The Final Report Scope, Criteria and Methodology sections are
complete and no changes are anticipated. Analyses and qualification of
installations assigned to Westinghouse Corporation have been completed,
All current criteria and design input data have been transmitted to
Westinghouse. They have reviewed recent changes to certain input data
and anticipate no further modifications to be required. This estimate
includes iterations due to construction interface and as-built review.
Table 2.1 tabulates the status of .this information.
All large bore piping has been reviewed and qualified. However, certain
calculations exist with inputs identified as preliminary or results which
require review and acceptance. The notes to the table describe items
which require closure of documentation and an assessment of each item's
significance. These items should not'be totaled as an indication of
analyses with open items as many analyses contain more than a single item..
A small number of iterations of pipe analyses may also result from
problems encountered during support design review and redesign associated
with recently issued analyses and construction difficulties encountered
during support or pipe modification.
2
Thirty-eight minor pipe modifications'have been issued to date and
construction has completed thirty-five.
August 12, 19830040D/0116P
-1 4-
Table 2.1
DIABLO CANYON PROJECT'I
PHASE I CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAN STATUS
AreaSection Description
Desi n ReviewNethod- Cal c. or
Criter1a ology AnalysesRev1ew Review Review
r
LARGE BORE PIPING
Des1 n Revision or'Regnal slsCriter1a Clartf1ed andNethodolo Est blished
Nethod-OCN DCN ology Cal c. Cal c'. Cele.Pre . A r. Estab. Pre . Check. A r.
o Local Stress 100 100 100 l00 100 100 100 l00 100 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Nozzle Loads - Sixty-six analyses conta1n nozzle loads which requ1re documentation of acceptance to current loads. Some add1tional analysismay result from this item.
Spectra - All analyses conta1n the proper current spectra with the exception of two. Spectra for these problems have been rev1sed end theanalys1s are be1ng rerun.
3. Local Stress Evaluation - Approximately th1rty eight local stress evaluat1ons are anticipated to close th1s 1tem. Host evaluations are1«rations to ex1sting calculation caused by load changes and a few w1ll be caused by new support des1gn. Few 1f any des1gn changes will,result from th1s act1vity. These des1gn changes would be 1ssued as a part of large bore pipe stress modificat1ons.
Flued Head Loads - Approx1mately 36 analyses conta1n containment penetration flued heads wh1ch rema1n to be qualif1ed for revised analysisloads. No further modifications are expected.
5. E1ght analyses are impacted by p1p1ng reroutes wh1ch are caused by SIP or construct1on 1nterferences Few p1pe support modificat'ons areexpected.
A «nal walkdown 1s be1ng performed to inspect pipe clearances and verify general p1ping conf1guration. Few mod1fications are an icipated.
Dne analysis contains a valve. for wh1ch a support react1on remains to be qual1fied. No mod1f1cat1on 1s expected.
August l2, 198300400/0086P
-15-
~"4
All small bore piping associated with both the Generic and Sample
Programs has been reviewed and qualified with a few exceptions (Table
2.2) ; In addition, certain calculations exist with inputs identified as
preliminary or results which require review and acceptance by others.
The notes to the table describe a listing of items which require closure
of documentation or completion of a calculation activity. The
significance of each item is addressed.
Some computer analyses may require revision due to possible future
changes in input data such as spectra or header movements.
A small number of iterations of pipe analyses may also result from
,problems encountered dur ing support design review and redesign associated
with recently issued analyses and construction difficulties encountered
during support or pipe modification.
2
Ten pipe modifications have been issued and construction is complete.
2
r
August 12, 19830040D/01 16P
-1 6-
AreaSection Descript)on
Des1 n ReviewCele. orAnalysesReview
Hethod-Cr1 ter1a ologyReview Revle'w
Table 2.2
DIABLO CANYON PROJECT
PHASE I CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAH STATUS
SHALL BORE PIPING
Oes1 n Revision or Regnal s1sCr1ter1a. Clar1f led andethodolo 'stabl 1 shed
Nethod-OCN OCH ology Cele. Calc.Pre A r stab Pre Chec
1: As-Bullts - Reconciliation of as-bullts.to date has resulted ln a redesign rate of 25$ . Approximately 1500 as-built reconclllatl ins areoutstanding which ls pro)ected to cause 40 lteratlons to design. There are 350 as-bullts required for fuel load.
2.
3.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Construction D1Fflcultles - presently, approximately 1W of the modified pipe supports require a design iteration to allow constr actioncocpletlon. Based on 1035 supports requiring construction completion, 104 support design changes are anticipated.
Civil Verification - Presently. approximately 1X of the support designs issued with increased loads require redesign or additional structuralsteel design to obtain civil approval of the loading on the structure. Approximately 20 additional aodlflcatlons are antlclpatec to resultfrore,this acti v1 ty.
Small Bore Support Loads - Approximately 30 supports require confirmation of the attached small bore support load. No modifications areanticipated.
Equipment Restraint - Confirmation of the acceptance of support attachments to the two RHR pumps ls outstanding. No modification isanticipated.
Spectra Change Impact on S. I.p. - Changes to spectra have caused many Design Class II supports, which were modified for System Ir:eractlonwith Design Class I installations, to be reviewed. This work ls essentially complete but 12 more modifications are anticipated.
STRUDL - One version oF the STRUDL program used for support qualification has been found to.contain a few errors. The errors har r been.corrected and program reverification completed. Reviews performed to date lndlcate that support qualification conclusions are ui ffected..Nore reviews and recalculation are required to close this issue, but no design changes are anticipated.
Engineering Judgement - 270 supports require review for piping analysis qualified by englneerlng )udgement.
August 12. 198300400/0086 P
-20-
2.4 Small Bore Pi e Su orts
All small bore supports associated with both the Generic and Sample
programs have been reviewed and qualified (Table 2.4). However,
iterations of piping analyses due to input revisions and changes to
spectra and temperatures and operating modes are causing support review
and redesign. Pres'ently, approximately 49 supports out of 2500 require
, requalification due to these changes. Very few modifications are
expected to result from this effort. In addition, support
qualification/design iterations will occur as described in the notes to
the table. The significance of each item is addressed.
One hundred fifty supports are in the construction process. 1500 are
.,installed.
August 12, 19830040D/0116P
-21-
g ~
Section
2.2.2
AreaDescription
Small BoreSupports
n lc Revl
Desi n Review¹ethod- Gale. or
Criteria ology . AnalysesReview . Review Review
Table.2.4
DIABLO CANYON PROJECT
PHASE I CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRA¹ STATUS
SHALL BORE PIPE SUPPORTS
Desi n Revision o'r Regnal slsCriteria Clarified andHethodolo Established
¹ethod-DC¹ DC¹ . ol'ogy Gale. Cele.Pre A r Estab Pre Check
As-Bullts - Reconclllatlon of as-builts to date has resulted in a redesign rate of 2X. Approximately 800 as-built reconciliation areoutstanding which ls pro)ected to cause 16 iterations to design.
Construction Olfflcultles - Presently, approximately 2-1/ of the modified pipe supports require a design iteration to allow co~:tructioncompletion. Based on 150 supports outstanding ln construction, 4 support design changes are anticipated.
Approximately 30 pipe supports require review for revised Large Bore analysis.
For these issues expanded investigation was required.-22-
August 12, 19830040D/0086P
SECTION 3. EQUIPMENT SEISMIC DESIGN
The status of the equipment seismic design work is presented in the
following. This includes Mechanical Equipment, Electrical Equipment andI
Instruments, and Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Equipment.
3.1 Mechanical E ui ment
The scope, criteria, and methodology phases of the program are 10(C
complete. For 100% of the mechanical equipment, calculations which
determine if the equipment is seismically qualified for a given set of
controlled seismic input have been competed (See Table 3-1).
3,2 Instrumentation and Controls
. The ISC work c'onsists of selected analysis, design, and construction\
activities. The status for all I and C equipment is presented in
Table 3-1.
For the analysis work completion means, the equipment qualification
levels have been compared to the appropriate required response spectra
and have been found acceptable. Some final documentation may be
outstanding.
Design work is complete when the DCN has been issued by engineering for
modifications to bring equipment- up to the qualified configuration.
,August 12, 19830040D/0116P
23»
Construction work is complete when all equipment modifications have be n
completed by General Construction. Some final .documentation may be
outstanding.
For Instrument tubing supports the analyses are complete as of
March 29, 1983 (Rev. 6 of DCM C-17), and the design and constructionI
resulting from these analyses are complete.
3.3 Electrical E ui
ment'ctivities
relating to Phase I are complete. Responses have been
provided to all RFIs and EOIs.
i
Section 2.3.2 of the Phase I Final Report provides the detailed
information for the Class IE electrical equipment.
3.4 ~NAC q I t(
The review of seismic qualification of Class I HVAC equipment has been-
completed as of August 16, 1983. This is based upon the application of
seismic spectra issued for project use. Table 3.1 tabulates the percent
completeness of major steps of the related work.
August 12, 19830040D/0116P
-24-
The seismic qualification of HVAC equipment is an ongoing process in
which the ana1yses wi11 be updated as new input are generated in
accordance with PEI-13 and DCM CH-52.
August 12, 19830040D/0116P
-25-
~ p~ J
SectionArea
Description
Table 3.1
DIABLO CAHVOH PROJECT
PHASE I CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAN STATUS. EQUIPNEHT SEISNIC DESIGN .
Desi n Reviev . 'esi n Revision or Regnal sisNethod- Calc. or Criteria Clarified and
DCNs Const. Built DCNsIssued. Compl. Compl. Compl.('A) '
ates
o Control 100room
press'adl
ation .
monitor(<)o Control 100
room press ~
Chlorinemonitor(4)
o Control 100rome airsupply rad.monitor
o Pressurizer 100SRV Pos.Indicator
o Sub-cooled 100.marginmonitor
o Process 100solenoidvalves
100
10D
100
100
100
100
75
75
1DD
100
100
100
. 100
100
2.3. 2
2.3.3
Electr Ical 100Equipment(1)
HVAC Equip- 100ment
100
100
100(8) 100 95(9) 15 5 0 0
100 100 100 100 100 10D 10D 100 60 60 See 'e 1.
Notes: l. Scope of .this clerk ls defined and cccplete. The methodology phases of the program are 100K complete.
Coojplete defined as the issue of a controlled document which defines appropriate crlterla &lch includes load comblnatlons, selsaIc input.damping values and alliable stresses.
3. Complete ls defined as the issue of a formal document belch describes an appropriate methodology to be employed.
Devices Iclll be relocated due to high RRS at Elev. 190' Devices have been tested to test machine llmlts.5. Design modlflcatlon ls the result of neo annulus spectra.
6. Design aodlflcatlon ls the result of equipment upgrade not design verlflcatlon.
August 12, 1983%400/0086P
-27-
'
0390(HNotes: l. Spectra for the turb1ne bu1ld1ng at elevat1on 190 ft are not available at this time. Equipment has been tested to shake table li=.its.
Equipment located 1n the turbine building at elevation )04 ft and above 1s qualified based on prel1minary spectra available.
8. Ouct-mon1tor HVAC. equipment analyzed 1s 9'omplete.9. issuance of design changes is about 75K complete, and construction 1s approximately SX complete.
KEY: A —Qualified to latest spectra 6 nozzle loadB —Currently high nozzle load. 'nticipate will be resolved by further analysis.C — Design change in progress.D —Currently high nozzle loads. Anticipated that support modifications will be required.
Fire Pump Notor Aux/115 0.39 0.350.78 0.701 '30 1.013
0 '60.520.55
DEDDE
HE
Portable Fire 'Pump (diesel) NSS/85 0.2 0.20.4 0.40.54 0.54
0. 130.270.50
OE
DDEHE
R
R
R
No
-32-
t
IDVP FINAL REPORTLIST OF TABLES
A TEI EDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES
. TABLE
5-3-932
TITLE
Modification in Response to Specific Error
EOI File: 932
FOLLOWSPAGE NO.
5.4.2-1
5-3-938
5-3-949
Modification inEOI File: 938
Modification in
Response to Specific Error
Response to Specific Error 5.4.2-1
5-3-963EOI File: 949
Modification in Response to Specific Error
EOI File: 963
5'.4.2-1
5-3-1069 Modification in Response to Specific Error
EOI File: 1069
5-3-1107 Modification in Response to Specific Error
EOI File.: 1107
5-3-8009 Modification =in Response to Specific ErrorEOI File: 8009
5-3-8010 Modification in Response to Specific Error
EOI File: 8010
5-3-8012 Modification in Response to Specific Error
EOI File: 8012
5.4.'2-1
5.4.2-1
5.4.2-1
5.4.2-1'.4.2-1
5-3-8017
5-3-8057
Modification in
EOI File: 8017
Modification in
Response to Specific Error
Response to Specific Error
'.4.2-1
5-4-983 Modification in
EOI File: 8057
5-3-8062 Modification inEOI File: 8062
Response to Specific Error
Response to Generic Concern
5.4.2-1
5.4.2-1
5.4.2-1'-4-1014EOI; File: 983
Modification inEOI File: 1014
Response to Generic Concern 5.4;2-1
IDVPFINAL
X1 REV 1830816
4
1 ~
ll
A TEI EDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVIt ES
TABLE
5-4-1026
5-4-1092
5-4-1098
5-4-8009
5-4-8057
7.3-1
7.3-2
7.3-3
7.3-4
7.3-5
7.3-6
7.4-1 ,
IDVP FINAL REPORTLIST OF TABLES
TITLE
Modification in Response to Generic Concern
EOI File: 1026
Modification in Response to Generic Concern
EOI File: 1092
Modification in Response to Generic Concern'OIFile: 1098
Modification in Response to Generic Concern
EOI File: 8009
Modification in Response to Generic Concern
EOI File: 8057
Phase I Corrective Action Program Status:Civil StructuralPhase I Corrective Action Progr am Status:,Large Bore PipingPhase I Corrective Action Program Status:Small Bore PipingPhase I Corrective Action Program Status:Large Bore Supports
Phase I Corrective Action Program Status:Small Bore Pipe SupportsPhase I Corrective Action Program Status:Equipment Seismic Design
Status, of Incomplete VerificationsDefined by ITRs-8, -34, and -35
FOLLOWS
PAGE NO.
5.4.2-1
5.4.2-1
5.4;2-1
5.4.2-1
5.4.2-1
7.3.3-1
7.3.3-1
7.3.3-1
7.3.3-1
7.3.3-1
7.3.3-1
7.4-4
IDVPFINAL
X11 REV 1830816
4
-s<-TELEDYNEENQlNEERlNQ SERVlCES
where necessary to assess the effects of various DCP assumptions and
calculations. For the auxili lary building, the IDVP performed separ-
ate analyses, such as sensitivity studies for the dynamic models, toP
assess the significance of modeling parameters.
Two EOIs were written as a result of the IDVP verification:P
EOI 1124 was issued for the finite element modeling of the con-
'trol room floor slab. The location of the supporting walls in
the model did not match the actual locations. This model was
used to generate Hosgri floor response spectra. The DCP has
corrected -.this error. The IDVP then verified that slab quali-fication analyses for vertical loading were acceptable. This
EOI was classified as a Class B Error, and the error resolved
.by verification of the DCP reanalysis.
EOI 1132 was issued because the Auxiliary Building DCP member
evaluations had been reported as being complete. This file was
combined with EOI'097. The DCP is still in the .process ofevaluating the slabs for in-plane loads, and this effort issubject to further verification.
The verification program intended to be conducted by the IDVP is not
yet completed.. Based upon the efforts performed to June 25,. 1983, theIDVP considers the following aspects of the DCP work to be acceptableand to satisfy the licensing criteria:
o gualification analyses reflect the as-built structure.
~ Accidental eccentricities for the concrete portions were
applied properly.
o The synthetic time-histories used for analyses give an
acceptable representation of the smooth design spectra.
IDVPFINAL
4.4.2-7 REV 1830816
4.4.3 Fuel. Handling Building
A TELEDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES
The Fuel Handling Building (FHB) is a Design Class I steel-framedstructure which. is supported at elevation 140 feet of the auxiliarybuilding. The building dimensions are 58 feet (E-W direction) by
366 feet (N-S direction) by 48 feet high. It supports a fuel handling
bridge crane 'nd houses other equipment. -Moment-resisting steelframes 'in the East-West direction and cross-braced columns .in the
North-South direction comprise the structural system. The roof is a
trussed and cross-braced diaphragm covered with metal decking and
built-up roofing. A portion of the end frames in the East-West direc-tion are supported 'on a concrete wall common with the fan rooms.
~ In accordance with the FSAR and'osgri report, Design Class I struc-tures must be'ualified for all .seismic events; thus, member evalua-tion for the structural steel members was performed- for the DE, DDE,
and Hosgri events and the required loading combinations.
4.4.3.1 Verification of Corrective Action
The IDVP. verification of the DCP Corrective Action Program for the FHB
is defined in 'ITRs-8 and -35. The IDVP verification consisted ofexamining on a sampling basis the analyses for both seismic,and non-
seismic loads. The seismic loads are the DE, DDE, and Hosgri events,while the non-siesmic loads are dead, live, wind, temperature, etc.
. The IDVP will perform a field inspection of the FHB when modifications're complete. Connections, additional, members and/or removed members,
'etc., will be examined and checked for conformance with the design and
qualification analyses. ITR-57 reports on the IDVP" verification ofthe FHB.
The DCP conducted its evaluation of the criteria implementation and
qualification analyses through the Internal Technical Program (ITP).
IDVPFINAL
4.4.3-1 REV 1830805
I
A TELEDYNE'NQINEERlNQ SERVlCES
=- ~ Time history analyses (Hosgri) of the dynamic models which
produced response spectra and provided accelerations foruse in the equivalent static model.'he input time historyfrom elevation 140 feet of the auxiliary bui 1 ding was also
reviewed.
o Evaluation of the nodal accelerations used to determine
equivalent static loads.
o'omputation of loads 'for the equivalent static analysisand a sample of'he computer runs for a static analysis1 oad .case.'
Comparison of selected member loads with member allowablesloads for the postulated Hosgri event.
l
The selected sample covers approximately SO% of the structure dynamic
anal'yses, excluding the crane-, and the same percentage for the static*ana'lysis and member evaluation. The IDVP did not review the prelim-inary'tatic model, which was used by the DCP as a .basis for determin-ing analysis and modification requirements.
No EOIs were -issued for the FHB with regard to the DCP CorrectiveAction Program.
The ver'ification program intended. to be conducted by the IDVP is com-
plete. except that the as-built condition wi 11 be. field verified'gainst the design drawings used as the basis for the analyses. Based
upon the efforts performed to August 19, 1983,, the IDVP considers thefollowing aspects of. the DCP work to be acceptable and to satisfy thelicensing. criteria:
IDVP.
FINAL'..4.3-.3 REV 1
830816
A TELEDYNEENGlNEERING SERVICES
~ 'mission of an allowance for accidental eccentricity in
the FHB because the torsional effects are accounted for in
the auxiliary building response at elevation 140 feet.
~ The ranges of crane locations and assessment of the'ir
effects upon results.
o'he dynamic models used in the FHB evaluation.
e Response spectra generation.
~ Equivalent static loads determined from the dynamic accel-
eration profiles.I
e gualification of members and connections.
The IDVP intends to formulate final conclusions as to the qualifica-tion of the FHB and conformance to licensing criteria'hen the DCP
modifications and field walkdown have been completed and the IDVP has
verified the as-built against the design conditions. This verifi-cation will be reported in Revision 1 to ITR-57. EOI 1092 will'ot be
closed until this field verification is complete.
(To Be Supplemented)
IDVPFINAL
4.4.3-4 REV 1830816
~< TEI EDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
The review of the PGandE model resulted in two areas of concern..Thefirst had 'to do with the frame consolidation used to obtain the equiv-alent radial beam flexural rigidity properties. The IDVP concludedthat the frame consolidation does not adequately represent the struc-ture at elevations 101 and 106 feet.
The second concern was that the PGandE model does not consider the. possible effects of tangential beam flexibility on local response
spectra. The IDVP studies included simple one and two degrees-of-freedom lumped mass models which confirmed that the tangential beam
flexibility is an important factor in the resp'onse spectra generation.
The results and conclusions of the verification review of the contain-ment annulus has been reported in ITR-50. The conclusions relative tothe specfic concerns of the NRC letter are:
There are no significant differences in the computed
masses and member joints (with the exception of the BNL
error in the slab to crane wall connection mentioned) be-
tween the 1981/1982 URS/Blume analyses and BNL (Model B)
analysis.
'I
~ The joint characteristics in the Blume analysis realistic-.ally represent the as-built configuration.
o The spectra smoothing technique applied by PGandE is con-
sistent with the DCNPP licensing criteria.
~ The issue of discrepancies between design piping analysesand the as-built configurations is a generic concern thathas been identified by the IDVP and is discussed in 4.5.2.
e The significance of the errors in the modeling of bends in"annulus structure piping is considered negligible.
IDVPFINAL
4.4.5-3 REV 1830805
><-TEI EDYNEENQlNEERINQ SERVlCES
4.4.6 Intake Structure
The intake structure is a massive Design Class II .concrete structure
that. houses the Design Class I Auxiliary Saltwater (ASW) Pumps. The
vent shaft and snorkel pipes, as well as nearby supporting equipment,
are part of the ASW system. The dynamic analysis of the Intake Struc-
ture produces response spectra. used as input to these systems..'n
accordance with the FSAR, a Design Class II 'structure is required
to retain its .integrity during 'a seismic event so that the function of
Class I equipment will not be impaired. Hence, the DCP has evaluated
the structural integrity of the intake structure for the postulated
Hosgri event, but floor response spectra used for evaluation ofN
safety-related equipment have been computed for DE, DDE and Hosgri
conditions.
4.4.6.1. .Verifi'cation of Corrective Action
The IDVP verification of the DCP Corrective Action Program for the in-take structure is defined in ITRs-8 and -35. The IDVP review con-
.sisted of examining the qua'lification of the structure for seismic and
non-seismic loads. The seismic loads are the DE, DDE, and Hosgri
events, while the non-seismic loads are soil bearing pressures, hydro-
dynamic, wave force, dead and live load, and missile loads. ITR-58
reports the IDVP verification of corrective action for the intake
structure.
The DCP reviewed the as-built drawings to ensure an accurate input tothe analysis and made modifications as necessary, as detailed in the
PGandE Phase I Final Report. For the intake structure, the DCP re-viewed and accepted the 'dynamic analysis, member evaluation, genera-
tion of response spectra, and structural stability calculations per-formed by URS/John Blume Associates. In'ddition, the Blume Internal
IDVPFINAL
4.4.6-1 REV 1830816
->i-TELEDYNEENQINEERlNQ SERV!CES
o The flow straighteners possessed adequate strength using
the ductility criteria specified. Walls and slabs were
qualified without the use of ductility considerations.
o Vent shaft system was shown to be adequate.
As noted by the above statements and by consideration of the DCP qual-
ification analyses, the IDVP considers the intake structure to be
qualified and to meet licensing requirements. The sliding, over-
turning and soil bearing pres'sure calculations are under continuing
review as discussed in 4.9.2, and will be reported in ITR-68 and in
Revision 1 to ITR-58.
(To Be Supplemented)
IDVPFINAL
4.4.6-4 'REV 1
830816
-r<-TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES .
reviews, specific areas of interest were chosen for re-views. These sp'ecific areas included items such as valvemodeling and qualification, application of stress intensi'-fication factor, spectra'nputs, etc. Alternate calcula-tions were performed by the IDVP as necessary to review
DCP calculations.
As a result, of the above-described activity, four. EOIs
were issued. EOI 1126 addresses the SIF discrepancy forintermediate butt welds and the omission of a SIF of 1.9
'at valve/elbow interfaces. This item has been incorpor-ated into the DCP final review checklist for review ofpotential impacts on all DCP analyses, and the file has
been closed.
EOI 1133 addresses the discrepancy noted for one DCP valvemodel where only two-thirds of the required eccentric mass
was considered in the DCP analysis. This item has been
determined, to be a Class C Error and has been resolvedthrough revision of the DCP analysis.
EOI 1135 addresses the discrepancies in . valve body . and
operator weights for valves LCV-113 and -115. This itemhas been determined to be a Class C Error and resolvedthrough revision of DCP analysis.
EOI 1137 addresses a discrepancy in valve weight for FCV-
365. This EOI together with EOIs. 1133 and 1135 combined
to form a gener'ic concern with valve modeling. The itemhas been, incorporated into the DCP Final Review checklistfor review of potential impacts on all DCP analyses. The
concern of EOI 1137 was determined to be a Class C Error.
IDVPFINAL
The verification program intended to be conducted by theIDVP is not yet'omplete. Based 'pon the efforts
4.5.2.3-4 REV 1
830816
-A-TELEDYNEENQINEERlNQ SERVlCES
performed to August 15, 1983, the IDVP considers the
following aspects of the DCP work to be -acceptable and to
satisfy the licensing criteria.
The DCP reanalysis of all original work 'nd the
development of the DCP final review checklist is an
'ppropriate program for qualification of all DCP
analyses.
qualification analyses'n general reflect the as-
built conditions.
4 Overall modeling methods were found acceptable,
except for application of stress intensificationfactors (SIF) and valve modeling as noted above.
Loadings used in the DCP analyses were found
acceptable. Loading data were found properly con-
trolled and applied by the DCP.
Internal documentation was found to be in sufficient~ detail to allow the verificatioh of transfer of data.
Computer files and descriptions were indexed.
Stress analyses were found accept'able for all review-
ed analyses except Analyses 2-111, Revision '0; and
4A-100, Revision 0, which contained unique discrep-
. ancies and were reanalyzed by the DCP.
Numerical accuracy of the calculations sampled was
adequate.
In summary, the IDVP concluded that DCP is followingestablished procedures and licensing criteria, and ismeeting the latest loading criteria and operating. modes.
The concerns on stress intensification factors and valve. modeling were determined to be generic concerns. These
IDVPFINAL
4.5.2.3-5 REV 1
830816
J
-«-TELEDYNEENQlNEERlNQ SERVlCES
generic concerns are resolved by the inclusion of specific
checks in the DCP final review checklist. Certain valve
models and SIFs will be reviewed by the IDVP after they
have passed the DCP final review. None of the specif ic
concerns that led to these two generic concerns caused an
exceedence of the licensing criteria. The DCP Corrective
Action Program for . Design Class 1 large bore piping
adequately covers all essential steps required to obtain
proper qualification of the piping.
The IDVP intends to formulate a final conclusion as to the
qualification of large bore piping and its conformance to
licensing criteria when the IDVP verification iscompleted.
(To Be Supplemented)
b. Larg'e Bore Piping Supports
The IDVP verification of the DCP Corrective Action Program
for large bore pipe supports is defined in ITRs -8 and-35. The IDVP review consisted of an examination of quali-fication of each pipe support for all seismic and non-
'seismic loads. Seismic loads are the DE, DDE, and Hosgri
.events, while non-seismic loads are deadload, thermal
accident, friction, fast valve closure, and relief valve
opening thrust. This activity will be reported in ITR-60.
IDVPFINAL
4.5.2.3-6 REV 1
830816
P> TELEDYNEENGlNEERINQ SERVlCES,
criteria and, accuracy. of calculations., The process by
which the IDVP selected support samples included .the
fo 1 lowing:
~ In general, the selected supports, were associated
with piping that was part of the IDVP large bore pip-ing sample.
Several supports were selected as a result of IOVP
field verification activities for piping samples.
o The OCP General Pipe Support Status (GPSS) log was
reviewed to determine revision'tatus, respectivepiping analyses, etc. This status log listed approx-
imately 6000 to 7000 supports.
~ Supports were selected to represent various support
types, pipe sizes, plant locations, and organizations(consultants) performing desigh analyses.
The IOVP selected a total of 22 support analyses for.re-view. The support types. were as follows:
,o 3 snubbers
~ 6 spring hangers
o' anchors
I 7 rigid supports
The IDVP performed design reviews for the selected 'CPanalyses to verify .the following aspects of the designanalysis:
'4.5.2.3-8 REV 1
830818
A TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
.performed a finite element analys i s which appl ied the
piping spectra to this support and demonstrated thatcriteria were satisfied., The IDVP has verified thisanalysis and EOI 1122 was resolved as a Deviation. The
IDVP does not consider it a generic concern.
EOI .1129 notes that errors were made in calculating 'the
weld stress for a 1/4-inch weld between pipe lug and
supporting steel on Pipe Support 56S/3A. These errorsoffset each other and no overstress occurred. This item
'as. been classified as an error Class C. This EOIdoes'ot
represent a generic concern.
EOI 1131 notes that the design analyses for Pipe Supports58S/16V and 63/26V do not evaluate the shear lugs and
attachment 'welds, as required in the DCP Corrective ActionProgram. The DCP has revised these analyses to includethe shear lugs and attachment welds. The IDVP review ofthe revised DCP calculations shows these, stresses to be
small. This EOI has been classified as a deviation.
The verification program intended to be conducted by theIDVP is not yet complete. Based . upon the effortsperformed to June 25, 1983, the IDVP considers thefollowing aspects of the DCP work to be acceptable and tosatisfy the licensing criteria.
'e Support drawings are satisfactory.
e Loads and load combinations used in the pipe supportanalyses are correct.
o Pipe support frequencies are satisfactory (except as
noted in EOI 1122).
IDVPFINAL
4.5.2.3-10 ~ .REV 1
830816
I
ATELEDYNE'NG|NEERINQ SERVtCES
A design review checklist was developed for the IDVP,re-
. view to ensure that all necessary items were examined and
documented. Checklist 'observations were. further expanded
with comments where clarification or more detailed con-
sideration was appropriate. In addition to the checklist,the IDVP design review included asessments of the com-
pleteness, applicability, and consistency of - the DCP,
review and reanalysis methodology.
'he
IDVP performed an analysis package'nd .pipe 'support
review to evaluate the completeness of all pertinentdesign input data, output results and associated documen-
tation.
Alternate calculations were performed by the IDVP, where
necessary, to assess the effects of various DCP . assump-P
tions and to confirm calculations.
- The IDVP selected a sample of 8 DCP smal 1 bore pipesupport analyses to ensure conformance to DCP criteria and
accuracy of calculations; The selection process included
the following:
~ The DCP list of small bore supports that com-
prised the full DCP review sample (approximately210 supports) was reviewed by the IDVP.
~ Supports were selected to represent varioussupport types, pipe sizes, plant locations, and
organizations (consultants) performing design
, analyses.
IDVPFINAL
4.5.3.2-7 REV 1830818
\
>i-TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
~ In general, the selected supports were associat-
ed with piping that was part of the IDVP small
bore piping sample.
~ Several supports were selected as a result of
IDVP field verification activities for piping
samples.~ ~
One EOI report was issued.. EOI 1039 was classified as a
Class C error because of an error in the DCP support
deflection evaluation. The DCP revised their analysis to
show support met criteria.
The verification program intended to be conducted by the
IDVP is not yet complete. Based upon the efforts perform-
ed to August 19, 1983, the IDVP considers the followingaspects of the DCP work to be acceptable:
~ The .small bore pipe supports analyzed by the DCP
adequately represent the worst cases for the
issues/design considerations determined by theirgeneric and sampling reviews.
~ Support drawings are satisfactory.
~ Pipe support drawings and information used inthe analyses reflect the as-built conditions.
~ Loads and load combinations used in the pipesupport analyses are correct.
~ Standard component supports such, as springhangers, snubbers, and pipe clamps are satis-factory.
IDVPFINAL
4.5.3. 2-8 REV 1
830818
A TELEDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES
~ All eight analyses meet criteria.
The IDVP intends to formulate a final conclusion as to the
qualification of small bore pipe supports and their con-
formance to licensing criteria when the IDVP verificationhas been completed.
(To Be Supplemented)
IDVPFINAL
4.5.3.2-9 REV 1
830818
r4 ~
I
I"
A TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVtCES
4.6.2.2 Verification of DCP Activities
The IDVP verification of DCP work on tanks is defined by ITRs -8 and
-35. The IDVP verification of the DCP work includes all aspects
described in Section 4.6.1 and the following aspects were emphasized:
~ Verification of the PGandE review methodology to assure
'hat the correct spectra were checked by PGandE against
qualification analyses.
e Completeness of qualification
The'result's of the verification have been reported in ITR-67.
The DCP Internal Technical Program for equipment consisted of a review.
of the seismic qualification, implemented by checking the latestseismic qualification data against those used for the qualification ofequipment. This check used the latest response spectra for the DE,
DDE, and Hosgri event. Whenever changes to the response spectra
. required requalification of the equipment, the equipment was requali-fied by analysis or testing. Equipment identified for review was thatassociated with the engineered safety systems - designed by PGandE
(Reference PGandE Phase I Final Report).
The CCW surge tank was s'elected as the IDVP verification sample of the
DCP implementation. The CCW surge tank is a Design Class I tank and
is located atop the auxiliary building at elevation 163 feet. This
tank is classified and built to ASME Section VIII (Rules for, Constr uc-
tion of Pressure Vessels). This is one of five mechanical tanksreviewed by the DCP. Of the five, three were verified for Hosgri'loadings as part of the initial sample. Of the two remaining tanks,only the CCW surge tank was required to be evaluated for both DE and
DDE loadings.
IDVPFINAL
4.6.2..2-1 REV 1830816
'R
~ "~
r< TELEDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES
The IDYP .performed a design review for the OCP reanalysis. A check-list was developed which covered all required criteria items, 'ndcritical analytical procedures, and ensured completeness of the IOVP
review. In addition to the check. list, the IOVP review includedassessments of the completeness, applicability, consistency, and
adequacy of the OCP review and reanalysis methodology. Where discrep-ancies were noted, or. methodology was deemed not totally appropriate,alternate calculations were carried out by the IDVP to verify the con-clusions of the'CP reanalysis.
The IOVP issued EOI 1136 which noted that the OCP analysis for the CCW
surge tank calculated bolt shear stress allowables that did not con-form'o established DCP criteria and the ASME code. However, the boltstresses remain below . the correct allowable values. The OCP analysisalso did not consider internal pressure induced, stress in the tank forthe evaluation of tank stresses at the nozzle. Tank stresses wouldexceed the specified allowable stress if pressure was considered usingthe same values and procedures as the OCP analysis. "However, it was
determined that the OCP reanalysis was very conservative and theactual pressure stresses were negligible. Thus, actual total stresseswere below criteria and EOI 1136 was determined 'to be a Class C Error.
The technical aspect's of the verification program conducted by theIOVP has been completed and reported in ITR-67. 'ased upon theseefforts, the IDVP considers the followihg aspects of the OCP work tobe, acceptable and to. satisfy the licensing criteria:
e The seismic spectra utilized by the OCP for tanks reflects~ the current spectra.
o The mathematical modeling used in the reanalysis was con-sidered to be acceptable.
IOVP'INAL
4.6.2.2-2 REV 1
830818
0
(I'q
-w-TELEDYNEENGINEER(NQ SERVtCES
o All established OCP criteria are considered to have been
adequately met.
The items identified in EOI 1136 are considered to be random
analytical discrepancies.
The IOVP intends to formulate a final conclusion as to the .qualifica-tion of all mechanical equipment and its conformance to licensingcriteria when all IOVP verification work in this area is 'complete.Effects of future revisions to seismic spectra and piping nozzle loadson equipment remain to be evaluated as part of the IOVP completionsamp.le.
(To Be Supplemented)
IOVP''FINAL
4.6.2.2-3 REV 1
830818
J
A TELEDYNEENG!NEERINQ SERVtCES
The one observation, EOI File 950, was the result of a discrepancy instiffener plate thickness determined from the field verification.Although the IDVP did not consider physical modifications of FCV-95 tobe necessary to satisfy criteria, the DCP modified all valvesspecified in'CO-G-M-876 by replacing a 3/8" thick plate with a plateof the 1/2" design thickness. The IDVP verified these'modifications.
No additional sampling or verification of valves was required.
4.6.3.2 Verification of DCP Activities
The IDVP. performed verification of DCP activities for Valves in ac-cordance with ITRs-8 and -35. The IDVP examined the DCP work for'llaspects discussed in Section 4.6.1. The results of this verificationhave been reported in ITR-67.
The DCP Internal Technical 'Program ( ITP) for Valves is closely tied tothe DCP efforts for piping. Certain valves were selected by the DCP
'for'eanalysis to determine valve natural frequencies and allowableaccelerations. These valves had been originally qualified by seismicservice-related contractors'o PGandE. Only "'otor-operated valveswith eccentric masses were reanalyzed. The allowable acceleration,results were then used by piping to determine if modifications to thevalve or pipe supporting structure were required.
Electro-Hydraulic Valve LCV-110 was selected as the IDVP verificationsample. The valve is a Design Class I level control valve located on
the pipeway .structure outside the containment building'. LCV-110 isone 'of the 6 different types of valves analyzed as part of the DCP's
ITP.
LCV-110 is one of four similar valves: LCV-110, 111, 113 and 115.This type of valve was 'selected for the IDVP review sample because asimilar valve had caused an overstress condition in the pipe line in
IDVPFINAL
4.6.3-3 REV 2830816
t
Ll
. -r<-TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
one of the IDVP initial sample piping analyses (Reference EOI 1069);
In addition, the actuator motor on these valves had been replaced.
The IDVP performed a design review of DCP reanalysis. A checklist was
developed which covered all criteria items, critical analytical pro-cedures, and completeness of the 'CP reanalysis. In addition. to'hechecklist, the IDVP design review included reviewer assessments on thecompleteness, applicability, consistency and adequacy of the DCP re-analysis methods. Where discrepancies were noted, or methods deemed ~
not totally appropriate, alternate calculations were carr ied out bythe IDVP to verify the conclusions of the DCP-reanalysis.
\
Actual piping accelerations as well as any additional valve support=bracing were not included in this portion of the review because theresults of this DCP reanalysis are to be used as 'criteria for the pip-ing system qua]ification.
No.EOIs have been issued in this review area to date.
The verification program intended to be conducted by the IDVP is notyet'omplete. Based upon the efforts performed to August 15, 1983,the IDVP considers the following aspects of the DCP work to be accept- .
able and to satisfy the licensing criteria.
- o , The methods and results of the reanalysis comply with theestablished DCP criteria.
~ Mathematical modeling of the valve adequately representsthe structure of the valve.
6 Critical areas were examined.
IDVPFINAL
4.6.3-4 REV 1
830818
~ ~
-><-TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
The, IDVP considers the following aspects of the DCP work to be unre-solved concerns at this time.
~ Resolution of the appropriate allowable stress criteriaapplicable to valve bolting.
The IDVP intends to formulate a final conclusion as to the qualifica-tion of and its conformance to licensing criteria when the IDVP veri-fication is complete.
.(To Be Supplemented)
IDVPFINAL
4.6.3-5 REV 1830818
4.6.4.3 Verification of OCP Activities
A TELEDYNEENGINEERINQ SERVICES
The IOVP verification of OCP activities for Pumps is defined by ITRs
-8 and -35. The IDVP review examines the OCP work for all aspects
described in Section 4.6.1 above. The results of this verificationhave been reported in ITR-67.
I
The OCP Internal Technical Program for Equipment consisted of a reviewof the seismic, qualification. This review consisted of checking thelatest seismic qualification data against those used for the qualifi-cation of equipment. This checking was performed using the latestresponse spectra for the OE, OOE, and Hosgri 'event. Whenever changes
'I
to the response spectra required requalification of the equipment,. theequipment was requalified by analysis or testing. Equipment identi-fied for review consisted of those associated with the engineeringsafety systems designed by PGandE (Reference OCP'hase I FinalReport).
Two identical fire pumps located in the Unit I Auxiliary Building atelevation 115 feet were selected as the IOVP verification sample. The
. fire pumps are Design Class I equipment.
This pump is one of eight pumps reviewed by the OCP. Of these eight,one was qualified by shake table testing (see Section 4.9.1) and isthus excluded from the 'sampling of reviewed/reanalyzed pumps. Five of *
the .remaining seven pumps were included in the IDVP initial sample and.
additonal verification work. Thus, with ,the IDVP review of the fire. pump, six of the seven pumps qualified by analysis and in the IDVP
scope have been verified.
The IOVP verification included assessments of the completeness,applicability, consistency, and adequacy of the OCP review andreanalysis methodology. Where discrepancies were noted,'rmethodology deemed not totally appropriate, alternate calculations
j
IDVPFINAL,
4.6.4.3-1 REV 1
830818
~> TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
were carried out by the IOVP to verify the conclusions of the DCP re-* analysis.
k
EOI 1140 was issued in connection with the fire pump and identifiedtwo concerns regarding the discharge nozzle flanged joint. The first
. concern, rela'tive to bolt stresses was resolved as a closed item after,further evaluation. The second concern, which. involved a non-
conformance of the installed flange configuration with PGandE pipingspecifications, resulted in an Error Class C.
The verification program intended to be conducted by the IOVP is notyet complete. Based upon the efforts performed to August 15, 1983,the IOVP considers the following aspects of the OCP work to be
acceptable:
~ Operabi.lity, as defined by rotating el'ement clearances and
.interfereces, was adequately demonstrated.
e. 'The seismic spectra utilized by the OCP for pumps reflectsthe current spectra.
o The mathematical modeling used in ".the reanalysis was
'judged to 'be acceptable for the fire pump.
~ With the exception of the item identified in the next.
paragraph all established OCP criteria are judged to havebeen adequately met.
'he IOVP considers 'the following aspects of the OCP work to be unre-solved concerns 'at this time.
o 'Flanges on pumps require reevaluation relating to the ap-propr'iate allowable stress values. to be used for the castiron, fire pump.
IDVPFINAL
4.6.4.3-2 REV 1
830818E
'I
A TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVlCES
The IDVP intends to formulate a final conclusion as to the qualifica-'tion of pumps and their conformance to licensing criteri,a when theIDVP verification'has been completed.
(To be supplemented)
IDVPFINAL
4.6.4.3-3 REV 0830818
K ~
I
lh 'i
)< TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
4.6.5.2 Verification of DCP Activities
.The IDVP verification of DCP, activities for heat exchangers is defined
,by ITRs -8 and -35. The IDVP verification of the DCP work includes'll aspects described in Section 4.6.1. The. results of the verifica-tion have been reported in ITR-67.
The DCP Internal Technical Program for equipment consisted of a review
of the seismic 'qualification. This review comprised checking the-latest seismic qualification data against those used for the qualifi-cation of equipment. This checking was performed using the
latest'esponse
spectra for the DE, DDE, and Hosgri event. '.Whenever changes
to the response spectra required requalification .of. the, equipment, the
equipment was requalified by analysis or testing. Equipment identi-fied for review comprised that associated with the engineered safetysystems designed by .PGandE (Reference PGandE Phase I Final Report).
,The DCP performed a reanalysis of the CCW pump lube oil cooler withrevis'ed seismic imputs.
: The CCW pump lube oil cooler was selected as the IDVP verificationsample of the DCP's ITP activities for heat exchangers. 'One lube oilcooler is. mounted with each of the thr'ee CCW pumps located .in the aux-
iliary building at elevation 73 feet.'he CCW pump lube oil coolersare Design Cl'ass I. Equipment. ..This cooler, or heat exchanger, is one
of two heat exchangers reviewed by the DCP. The'ther was the CCW:
heat.exchange'r', which was in the IDVP initial sample.
The IDVP performed a design review of the reanalysis. A checklist was
developed which covered all criteria items, and. critical analyticalprocedures, and ensured completeness of the DCP review.. In additionto the checklist, the IDVP work included assessments of the complete-ness, applicability, consistency of the reanalysis methodology. Where
discrepancies were noted, or methodology was deemed not totally .appro-I
IDVPFINAL
4."6;5.2-1 REV 1830816
f
-r<-TELEDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES
priate, alternate calculations were carried out by the IDVP to verifythe conclusions of the OCP reanalysis.
'One EOI file; 1130, was established. The OCP reanalysis of the CCW
pump lube oil cooler showed that-allowable criteria were exceeded and
that physical modifications were required. This reanalysis was theanalysis of record when the OCP had indicated that all ITP work inthis area was complete and no physical modifications were necessary(OCP Phase I Final Report, Revision 3, dated 4/22/83). There is no-
concern with the engineering of this item. The IOVP determined thatthe status of qualification was internally tracked within the OCP and
required "actions would have been implemented, even though this was notapparent from the DCP Phase I Final Report. EOI 1130 was resolved as
a Deviation.
The technical effort of the verification program intended to be con-ducted by the IDVP is complete except for IOVP/OCP agreement on theallowable stress criteria to be used for cast iron. Based upon theefforts performed to August 19, 1983, the IOVP considers the followingaspects of the OCP work to be acceptable:
Seismic spectra utilized in the reanalysis were the cur-rent spectra..
o . The methods and results of the reanalysis reviewed complywith the established OCP criteria.
o Mathematical modeling of the tank adequately represented~ the cooler structure.
I
~ Because all OCP reviewed heat exchangers are included inthe IOVP, all such heat exchangers have been verified as
complying with criteria.
IOVPF IHAL",
4.6.5.2-2 REV 1
830818
1 ~
g ~
J
~ g
wl
4 P
A
>> TELEDYNEENQINEERlNQ SERVlCES
~ these other areas are sufficiently large, and they have
not identified any similar concerns (see other equipment
sections).
~ If there are further instances of incorrect bolt size, the
IOVP does not bqlieve there wi 11 be an impact on licensingcriteria, for two reasons. First, the OCP has inspected
all bolt sizes in - HVAC equipment; any errors will be
within measurement tolerances. Second, all discrepanciesidentified by the IOVP were small and did not affectcr.i.ter ia.
To further strengthen these conclusions, the IOVP performed furtherfield verification for bolt sizes as part of the verification ofcorrective action. The results of this field verification confirm theconclusions above..
IOVP''
FINAL4.6.6.2-2 REV 1
830818
r< TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
4.6.6.3 .Verification of DCP Activities - HVAC Equipment
The IDVP performed verification of DCP activities for HVAC equipment
in accordance with ITRs -8 and -35. The IDVP verification of the DCP
work included all aspects described in Section 4.6.1 above. The
samples selected for IDVP review are representative of Design Class I
rotating machinery. The results of this verification have been
presented in ITR-67.
The DCP Internal'echnical Program (ITP) for equipment consisted of a
review of the newest seismic qua'lification data against data used forthe qualification of equipment. This check was performed using the
latest response spectra for the DE, DDE and Hosgri event. Whenever
changes to the response spectra required requalification of the equip-
ment; this was done by analysis or testing. . Equipment identified forreview was that associated with the engineered safety systems designed
by PGandE (see PGandE Phase 1 Final Report).
The DCP assembled documentation packages for seismic qualification of
all safety-related HVAC equipment. This equipment is identified and
the method of seismic qualification is documented. The qualificationis reviewed for effect of any seismic spectra changes. A reanalysis
or test was performed if the spectra affected the qualification of the
component. Redesign and modifications'ere implemented, if required,
to maintain qualification.
The sample selected by the IDVP for verification of the DCP'.s ITP forI
HVAC equipment consisted of supply fan S-1 and compressor CP-35.
Supply fan S-1 and a'n identical fan, S-2, are located in the auxiliarybuilding at elevation 85 feet. Compressor CP-35 and an identicalunit, CP-36, are located in the auxiliary building at elevation 154
feet, 6 inches. Both the fan and compressor are Design 'Class I equip-ment.
IDVPFINAL
4.6.6.3-1 'REV 1
830816
0
c
->< TELEDYNEENQlNEERlNQ SERVlCES
or incorrect value produced stresses within allowables. EOI 1125 was
classified as a Class C Error. The resolution is discussed under
"Hosgr i Spectra," section 4.3.2.2.
EOI 1127 was'ssued for two concerns over the modeling technique and
methods used in the reanalysis of fan S-1. One concern was resolved
as not significant .based on the IOVP initial sample work; The IOVP
determined, that the second concern was not valid and the'CP modeling
method was correct. EOI 1127 was classified as a Closed'tem;
The technical aspects of the verification program conducted by the"IOVP has been completed and reported in ITR-67. Based upon these
efforts, the IOVP considers the following aspects of the OCP work tobe acceptable and to satisfy the licensing criteria.
The mathematical modeling of the structures was found tobe adequate.
o Application and satisfaction of established OCP criteriawere, found to be adequate.
o A concern did exist over the proper control and applica-tion of seismic spectra, an issue which is related to work
done in the initial sample. The concern was resolved as
discussed in section 4.3.2.2.
The IOVP intends .to formulate a final conclusion as to the qualifica-tion of. and its conformance to licensing criteria when the IOVP verif-ication is complete. The IOVP effort will include a completion sample
to evaluate any changes in design input.
(To Be Supplemented)
IOVPFINAL
4.6.6.3-3 'REV 1830818
'4.6.7.3 Verification of DCP Activities
<<-TELEDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES
The IDVP performed verification of DCP activities for electricalequipment in accordance with ITRs -8 and -35. The IDVP review exam-
ined the DCP work for all aspects discussed in Section 4.6.1. Thiscategory of electrical equipment and instrumentation includes all such
equipment qualified by analysis. This verification effort has'eenreported in ITR-67. Equipment items qualified by shake table testingare discussed in Section 4.9.1.
The .DCP reviewed the previous seismic qualifications of equipment todetermine their vaTidity with respect to current spectra for the DE,
DDE, -and Hosgri event. If the analysis was invalid, the equipment was
reanalyzed to ensure qualification to the current response spectra and
then redesigned or modified as required. Equipment identified forreview is equipment associated with the engineered safety systemsdesigned by PGandE (see PGandE Phase I Final Report).
The station battery racks were selected as the IDVP verificationsample of. the DCP's review of electrical equipment qualified by anal-ysis. The racks support the station batteries, which are Design ClassI equipment. This equipment is located in the auxiliary building atelevation 115 feet.
The station battery racks are one of five major items of electricaland instrumentation equipment qualified by analysis that. are withinthe IDVP scope. Major equipment in this case excludes small panels,transmitters; switches, circuit breakers and other small items of thistype.
Of the five major equipment items, two were included in the IDVP ini-tial sample work: the main annunciator cabinet and the hot shutdownremote panel. Two others were included in the additional verificationsample: the local instrument panels and the instrument AC panel.-
IDVPFINAL
4.6.7-3 REV 1
830816
-r~-TELEDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES
Thus, with the inclusion of the station battery racks, all analyzed
major electrical equipment and instrumentation items have been
included in the IDVP verification effort.
The IDVP performed a design review of *the reanalysis performed 'by the
DCP on the station battery racks, using a checklist'o cover analysis
criteria items, critical analytical, procedures, and'ompleteness ofthe DCP review. In addition to the checklist, the IDVP design review
included assessments'n the completeness, applicability; consistencyand adequacy of the DCP review and reanalysis methodology. Where
discrepancies were noted, alternate calculations were carried out by
the IDYP to verify the conclusions of the DCP reanalysis.
'esults of the IDVP reviews of the DCP reanalysis of the station. battery racks are:
~ Seismic spectra used 'in the reanalysis were . the currentspectra.
'o, . No specific analysis criteria were formally establishedfor this equipment. However, the American In'stitute ofSteel. Construction Code was used by the. DCP as criteriafor the structural analysis.
e An incorrect bolt size, was used in the analysis.(See EOI 1128).
EOI '1128 notes that in the DCP reanalysis of the station battery racks3/8 inch bolts were used instead of the 1/2 inch bolts called for and
the shea~ force was incorrectly calculated. A further IDVP evaluationindicated that the structural integrity'f the racks was not impaired.EOI 1128 was,resolved as an Error Class C.
IDVPFINAL
4.6.7-4 REY 1830818
A TELEDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES
The verification program intended to be conducted by the IDVP is com-
plete. The IDVP considers the fo'llowing aspects of the DCP work to be
acceptable and to satisfy the licensing criteria.
o The seismic response spectra used by the DCP for elec-
trical equipment and instrumentation qualified by analysis
reflects the current spectra.
~ Although no specific criteria have, been established by the
DCP for analyses in this area, use of the AISC Code isadequate.
~ The mathematical modeling used for the reanalysis was con-
sidered to be acceptable and the results of the re'analysis
comply with DCP criteria.
-The IDVP intends to formulate a final conclusion as to the qualifi-cation of all electrical equipment and instrumentation and its can-
formance to licensing criteria when all IDVP verification work in thisarea is complete. Effects of any changes in the seismic design inputswill be evaluated as part of the IDVP Completion Sample.
(To Be Supplemented)
IDVPFINAL
4.6.7-5 REV 1830818
-s<-TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
The procedure utilized by the IDVP to perform the designreviews involved a combination of design review checklistsand alternate calculations. The latter were performed inthose cases where checklist review results were not suffi-
'ient to verify that supports met licensing commitments.
The IOVP verification of the DCP plan implementation was
based on a l00 percent sample of the OCP program for 'in-strument tubing and supports. The OCP program implementa-
. tion is contained in six qualification analysis packages
. which make up the IOVP scope for design review. One ofthe six packages contains the generic tubing span qualifi-cations. The remaining five contain tubing support quali-fications based on a DCP walkdown to identify contro'llingor specific worst-case configurations within the contain-
'mentannulus.
EOI 1123 was issued due to the use of incorrect member
properties for a particular support type. The member
properties were different from both the OCP documented as-built information and the IOVP field verified data, whichwere equivalent. The DCP concurred with this assessmentof the discrepancy, and the file was classified as a
,Class C Error..
The verification program intended to be conducted by theIOVP is not yet complete. Based upon the efforts per-
- fo'rmed to June 25, 1983, the IDVP considers the followingaspects of the OCP work to be acceptable
e. =-Four OCP qualification analyses have been verified tobe 'in conformance with procedures.
IOVPFINAL
4.6.8.2-3 . REV 1
830818
I
f A
-r<-TELEDYNEENGINEERINQ SERVICES
~ The OCP provided sufficient and accurate "as-built"survey documentation supporting OCP qualification an-alyses for 12 support types.
'The IDVP intends to formulate a final conclusion as to thequalification of instrument tubing and supports and theirconformance to licensing criteria when the IOVP verifica-tion has been completed.
(To Be Supplemented)
IDVPFINAL
4.6.8.2-4 REV 1
830818
W -P
P
~<-TELEDYNEENGINEERINQ SERVICES
4.6.9 Filters
The IDVP verification of DCP activities for filters is defined by
ITRs-8 and -35. The IDVP verification of the DCP work included allaspects described in 4.6.1. The results of the verification have been
reported in ITR-67.
The DCP Internal Technical Program for filters involved a review of
the seismic qualification. This review consisted of checking the
newest seismic qualification data against data used for the qualifi-cation of equipment., This check was performed using the latest r es-
ponse,,spectra for .the DE, DDE, and Hosgri event. Whenever changes to
the response spectra required requalification of the equipment, the
equipment was requalified by analysis or testing. Equipment identi-fied for review comprised that associated with the engineered safety
systems designed by PGandE (Reference PGandE Phase I Final Report).
this - includes the safety injection pump lube oil filter, diesel oiltransfer filter, and the strainer.
The safety injection pump lube oil filter was selected as the IDVP
verification sample. One lube oil filter's mounted with each of the
two safety injection pumps located in, the auxiliary building at eleva-
. tion 85 feet. The safety injection pump lube oil coolers are Design
Class I equipment.
For the safety injection lube oil filter, the IDVP performed a design
review of the the DCP reanalysis. A design review checklist was
developed which covered all criteria items, critical analytical proce-
dures, and completeness of the DCP review. In addition to the check-
list, the IDVP design'eview included reviewer assessments 'on the com-
pleteness, applicability, consistency, and reanalysis methodology.
Where discrepancies were = noted, or methodology deemed not totally
I,DVPFINAL
4.6.9-1'EV 1830816
~< TELEDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES
4.6.9 Filters
~ The IDVP verification of DCP activities for. filters is defined by
ITRs-8 and -35. The IDVP verification of the DCP work included allaspects described in 4.6.1. The results 'of the verification have been
reported in ITR-67.
The DCP Internal Technical Program for filters involved a review of
the seismic qualification. ..This review consisted of checking the
newest seismic qualification data against data used for the qualifi-cation of. equipment;, This check was performed using the latest res- .
ponse..spectr a for the DE, DDE, and Hosgri event. Whenever changes to
„ the response spectra required requalification of the equipment, the
equipment was requalified by analysis or testing. Equipment identi-fied for review comprised that associated with the engineered. safety
systems designed by PGandE (Reference PGandE Phase I Final 'Report).
this includes the safety injection. pump lube oil filter, diesel oiltransfer filter, and the strainer.
1
.The safety. injection pump lube oil filter was selected as the IDVP
verification sample. One lube oil filter'is mounte'd with each of the
two safety injection pumps located in, the auxiliary building at eleva-
.tion. 85 feet. The safety injection pump lube oil coolers are Design
Class I equipment.r
For the safety injection lube oil filter, the IDVP performed a design
review of the the DCP reanalysis. A design review checklist was
developed 'which covered all criteria items, critical analytical proce-
dures, and completeness of the DCP review. , In addition to the check-
list, the IDVP design review included reviewer'ssessments 'on the com-.
pleteness, applicability, consistency, and reanalysis methodology.
Where discrepancies were noted, or methodology'eemed not totally
I.DVPFINAL
4.6.9-1'EV 1830816
I
A TELEDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES
'I
appropriate, alternate calculations were carried out by the IOVP toverify the conclusions of the OCP reanalysis.
No EOI files were established for this category of equipment.
The technical„ aspects of the .verification program conducted by the
IOVP"has been completed and reported in ITR-67. Based upon these
efforts, the IOVP considers the following asp'ects of the OCP work tobe acceptable and .to satisfy the licensing criteria:
The seismic spectra utilized by the OCP for 'the filterreflect the current spectra (see 7.0).
Nathematical modeling adequately represented the filterand support structure.
e The methods and results of the reanalysis comply withestablished OCP criteria.
The IOVP intends to formulate a final conclusion as to the qualifi-cation of all mechanical equipment and its conformance to licensingcriteria. when all IOVP verification work in this area is complete.
Effects of future, revisions to the seismic inputs on equipment will be
evaluated as part of the IOVP Completion Sample."
(To Be Supplemented)
IOVPFINAL
4.6.9-2 REV 1830818
>s TELEDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES
In addition, utilizing the DCP jet impingement review results for a
'sample . of high-energy lines, the IDVP verified the jet-targetinteractions of each sampled postulated line break, and reviewed thesafety effects on safety-related equipment.
High energy lines were selected by the IDVP to represent approximately
10 percent of the estimated total number of postulated HELBs insidecontainment. The sample consisted of large and small lines includingreactor coolant piping as well as secondary system piping. Since theIDVP verification was conducted prior to the completion by the'CP oftheir reanalysis effort, the IDVP samp'le was drawn from the completed
work available. This represented approximately 50 percent of the highenergy lines inside containment. The IDVP field verified thejet-target interactions of each sampled postulated line break and
'eviewed the DCP .safety evaluation of the effects of these'et-targetinteractions.
- As a result of the. IDVP verification, four items of possible concern
were . identified and are reported in EOI 8065. The DCP. failed topr'operly identify these four safety-related targets which were
impinged upon by the sampled postulated pipe break events. However,
in comparison to the total of 273 DCP-identified jet-targetinteractions determined adequate by the IDVP, it was concluded thatthese four discrepancies were isolated instances and were notindicative of any generic deficiency in the jet impingement fieldreview. In addition, the results of further evaluation of thesejet-target interactions indicated - that accident mitigationcapabilities, would not be impaired due to these localized jetimpingement effects. On this basis, EOI File 8065 was closed.
REV 1
830816
The DCP reanalysis program a's established by the procedure and
criteria as well as the sampled documentation of this jet impingementreanalysis provided sufficient information for the IDVP to concludethat the specific concerns in EOI File 7002 were adequately addressedand documented. EOI File 7002 was closed.
-IDVP 4.8.5-2FINAL
C
r<-TELEDYNEENGlNEERlNQ SERVlcES
. where the number used is that for the EOI File identified as a Find-
ing. A history of each EOI File is contained in the LISTLOG printout
in Appendix D. The ITRs which include a detailed presentation of the
subject are identified in Table 5-1 and additional information is
available from the cross-indexes in Appendix E. Table 5-1 also refer-ences the final report section, or sections, which summarize the tech-
nical aspects of the file.
Although each EOI File identified as a Finding has been classified by
the IDVP as an ER/A, ER/AB, or ER/B, there are three different bases
8012, 8017, 8057, 8062) were classified on the basis of a
, technical error identified during verification of the
initial sample.
1 file (7002) was classified on the basis of the IDVP
evaluation of the gA Audits and Reviews.
e ~ 7 files (1003, 1014, 1022, 1026, 1092, 1097, 1098) were
classified as a r'esult of the establishment of the DCP
Corrective Action Program.
With respect to the last basis, none of these seven EOI Files had been
fully resolved by the IDVP at the time the Corrective Action Program
(CAP) was established. When the CAP was established, each of these
files was redefined .to track the generic DCP action and was resolvedby verification of DCP activities in accordance with ITR-8 and -35.EOI File 7002 also led to generic DCP action which was verified inaccordance with ITR-34..
'I
With respect'o the 13 EOI Files which resulted in a Finding on thebasis of a technical error, 6 developed from RLCA Phase I work and 7
from SWEC Phase II work. Of the 6 RLCA originated files, one (983)
IDVP,FINAL
5;2-2 REV 2830805
-«-TELEDYNEENQlNEERlNQ SERVlCES
was redefined to cover generic CAP efforts. The remaining 5 fileswere concerns specific to the item being evaluated by RCLA, but allwere influential in defining expanded IDVP activities in ITRs-1 or -8.
All 7 SWEC originated files were specific concerns, and all 7 con-
tributed to the identification of four generic concerns which were
verified in accordance with ITR-34.
.Several of the Table 5-1 pages indicate that other EOI Files were com-
bined with the file identified's the Finding. The existence of such
combined files should not be interpreted as increasing or decreasing
the number of Findings. In no case were two or more Findings combin-
ed. In all cases, each of the files being 'combined was tracking a
common concern. By combining the files, the overall concern'as more
readily tracked and each was more certain of proper resolution. When
the combination was with an EOI File originated by RCLA, the combined
concern was being addressed as part of the CAP and was subject to IDVP
verification in accordance with ITRs-8 and -35. There were only two
cases (EOI 8001s and 8012) where SWEC originated files were combined;
one also included two RFR originated files. The former affected the
evaluation of environmental conditions outside of containment and were
resolved by DCP activities verified in accordance with ITR-34. EOI
8012 considered separation and single failure criteria of Clas's lE
CRVP power supplies. .
IDVPFINAL
5.2-3 REV 2830805
It
t ~
<< TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
TABLE 5-1-1003
'IGNIFICANT FINDING: EOI FILE: 1003
'PHYSICAL MODIFICATION(S)7: No ERROR CLASS: A/B
TITLE: HVAC Duct Support Reanalyses
1., THE FOLLOMING EOI FILE NUMBERS MERE COMBINED MITH THIS FILE: 1077
2. STRUCTURE(S), SYSTEM(S) OR COMPONENT(S) INVOLVED: HVAC duct supports
3. SURGERY OF CONCERN:
Certain HVAC duct supports may not have been evaluated fol Hosgriloadings prior to 811008.
4. SUMMARY OF RESOLUTION:
DCP committed to review the seismic analysis and design of all~ Design Class 1 HVAC duct supports per Rev. 0 to Section 2.5.1 of 'the
DCP Phase I Final Report and to reanalyze and, if necessary,redesign such supports.
'The IDVP has verified the DCP Corrective Action per ITRs-8 and -35,with the exception of the concern addressed by EOI 1134 (having'odo with the application of the Rayleigh-Ritz method) which will beseparately addressed.
5- RESULTED IN ADDITIONAL VERIFICATION/SAMPLE OR VERIFICATION .OF DCPEFFORTS PER ITR(S): 8
6- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION SEE:
APPENDIX D AND SUBSECTION(S): 4.6.6INTERIM TECHNICAL REPORT(S): 15 and 63
IDVP~ 'INAL REV 2
830816
A TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
TABLE 5-1-1022
SIGNIFICANT FINDING: EOI FILE: 1022
PHYSICAL MODIFICATION(S)7: No ERROR CLASS: A/B
. TITLE: Intake Structure Reevaluation
1. THE FOLLOMING EOI FILE NUMBERS MERE COMBINED MITH THIS FILE: 967 and
988
2. STRUCTURE(S), SYSTEM(S) OR COMPONENT(S) INVOLVED: Intake structure\
3. SNNARY'OF CONCERN:
As a result of IDVP concerns listed in the above files and their own
internal technical program review, the DCP committed to a
reevaluation of the Intake Structure in their corrective action
program.
Modifications made with respect to wave-force effects must be
considered in the seismic reevaluation. I
4. SUMMARY OF RESOLUTION
Verification of DCP Corrective Action is complete.
5. RESULTED IN ADDITIONAL VERIFICATION/SAMPLE OR VERIFICATION OF DCP
EFFORTS PER ITR(S): 8
6. FOR. FURTHER INFORMATION SEE:
APPENDIX D AND SUBSECTION(S): 4.3 and 4.4.6INTERIM TECHNICAL REPORT(S): 10, 32, and 58
IDVP,FINAL
REV 2830816
'EV
I
PE. TELEDYNEENGINEERINQ SERVICES
TABLE 5-1-1069
SIGNIFICANT FINDING: EOI FILE: 1069
PHYSICAL MODIFICATION(S)7: Yes ERROR CLASS: A
TITLE: Auxiliary Feedwater System Valves LCV-113 and LCV-115
1. THE FOLLOWING 'EOI FILE NUMBERS WERE COMBINED WITH THIS FILE: None
2- STRUCTURE(S), SYSTEM(S) OR COMPONENT(S) INVOLVED: Valves LCV-113 and
LCV-115
1
3. SUMMARY OF CONCERN:
PGandE Piping Design Analysis 2-14 (prior to 811130) indicated'hatsupports are not required on the valves. The RLCA verificationanalysis showed supports are needed. This fact was confirmed with a
later PGandE analysis. Also, PGandE to obtain approval, from the
valve supplier of the addition of supports on the valve operator.
4. SUMMARY OF RESOLUTION:
Ver ification of modif ication and of valve qual ific'ation with the
added supports is complete.
„C
F
r
5.- 'ESULTED IN ADDITIONAL VERIFICATION/SAMPLE OR VERIFICATION OF DCP
'FFORTSPER ITR(S):8'.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION SEE:
'APPENDIX D AND SUBSECTION(S): 4.5.2INTERIM TECHNICAL REPORT(S): 12 and 59
IOVPFINAL
REV 1830816
r~
I I
g1
I
EE
%c
7
I
J
C
gf
4
A TELEDYNEENGINEERINQ SERVI| ES
TABLE 5-1-1092
SIGNIFICANT FINDING: EOI FILE: 1092
PHYSICAL MODIFICATION(S)7: Yes ERROR CLASS: A
TITLE: Fuel Handling Building Reevaluation/
'I I
1.. THE FOLLOWING EOI .FILE NUMBERS WERE COMBINED WITH THIS FILE: 990
991,. 1027, 1079, and 1091
2. STRUCTURE(S), 'SYSTEM(S) OR COMPONENT(S) INVOLVED: Fuel Handling
Building
3. SUMMARY OF CONCERN:
As a result. of IDVP concerns listed in the above files and their own
internal technical review, the DCP committed to a reevaluation of.the Fuel Handling Building in this corrective action program.
- 4. SCARY OF RESOLUTION:
Verificat'ion of DCP Corrective Action is complete except for fieldverification .against the, design drawings used as the basis for theanalyses'.
5. RESULTED IN ADDITIONAL VERIFICATION/SAMPLE OR VERIFICATION OF DCP .
EFFORTS PER ITR(S): 8,
6. 'OR FURTHER INFORMATION SEE:
APPENDIX D AND SUBSECTION(S): 4.4.3INTERIM TECHNICAL REPORT(S): 6 and 57
I
P
,I
' IDVPFINAL
REV 2~ 830816
C
-><-TELEDYNE.ENGlNEERlNG SERVlCES
TABLE 5-2-1124
SIGNIFICANT FINDING: EOI FILE: 1124
PHYSICAL MODIFICATION(S)7: NO ERROR CLASS: B
TITLE: Auxiliary Building Spectra Generation
1. THE FOLLOWING EOI FILE NUMBERS WERE COMBINED WITH THIS FILE: None
2.. STRUCTURE(S), SYSTEM(S) OR COMPONENT(S)'NVOLVED:
Control Room Floor Slab
3. SCARY OF CONCERN:
The design analysis finite element model of the control room slab
used to generate Hosgri response spectra did not agr ee with the
field v'erified location of the supporting walls.
The DCP has revised the finite element model to agree with the fieldverified dimensions. At certain frequencies the response spectra
have increased by more than 15 percent,
'I \
4. SUQ98Y OF RESOLUTION:
Resolved through IDVP verification of the revised DCP analysis..
5. RESULTED IN 'ADDITIONAL VERIFICATION/SAMPLE OR VERIFICATION OF DCP
EFFORTS PER ITR(S): 8
6..FOR FURTHER INFORMATION SEE:
APPENDIX D AND SUBSECTION(S): 4.4.2INTERIM TECHNICAL REPORT(S): 55
IDVPFINAL
P
REV 1830816
)<-TELEDYNEENGlNEERlNQ SERVICES
TABLE 5-3-1069
MODIFICATION IN RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC ERROR: EOI FILE: 1069
ERROR CLASS: A
1. STRUCTURE(S), SYSTEM(S), OR COMPONENT(S) INVOLVED:
Auxiliary Feedwater System, Analysis 2-14
2. DESCRIPTION OF PHYSICAL MODIFICATION:
Addition of supports on valves LCV 113 and LCV 115.
3. PHYSICAL MODIFICATION VERIFIED BY IDVP: Yes
4. FURTHER DESCRIPTION IS AVAILABLE IN TABLE 5-1-1069 AND IN PGandE
PHASE I FINAL'EPORT:
SECTION(S): 1.7.2; Appendix 1C
TABLE(S): 2.2.1-4
IDVP,FINAL
REV 1
830816
~ l
C
A TELEDYNEENGINEERINQ SERVICES
6.4.3 Significance as Indicated by EOI File Classification~
'he-EOI File classification'system described in 3.6.2 included a clas-
sification method. . As described in Section 5, the most significanterrors, which were termed Findings, were identified by classificationas Class A, Class A or Class B, or Class B Errors with no intent todistinguish significance among such classes. All IDVP Findings are
.summarized in Tables 5-1 and 5-2. As is indicated by the table ~ in-cluded in 5.5.4, 8 percent of the initial sample and additional veri-fication/sample EOI Files were classified as Findings. Another 16
percen't of these Files were combined with Findings as discussed inSection 5.
The second most significant grouping was that termed Observations,which included all EOI Files classified as Class C Errors or as Devia-tions. This. category would have also included Class 0 Errors had any
'een identified. EOI Files classified as Observations are summarized
by 5.5, and included 38 percent of the initial sample and additionalverification/sample files.
The remaining EOI Files resulting from the initial sample and addi-tional verification/sample efforts were classed as being neither Find-ings or Errors. These were 37 percent of the total.
Several of the EOI Files .resulted in the performance of modifications.The performance of modifications is a measure of significance, in that
'he
absence of modifications would indicate a negligible .impact .of theIDVP on the. actual DCNPP-1 configuration and. imply that any errorsidentified by the IDVP were only "paper" concerns. The matter of mod-
ificat'ions is treated briefly in 6.5, which references back to 5.4'nd,speci,fically, to Tables 5-3 and 5-4.
IDVPFINAL
6.4.3-1 REV 1830805
II
M" ~
~ '
C
N
'
J
II
4
7.4 IOVP STATUS AS OF JUNE 25, 1983
-)s-TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
This report was based upon the IOVP status as of June 25, 1983 and the
last revision considers additional work through August 19, 1983. The
overall status may be summarized by the statement that the IDVP has
completed all Phase I and Phase II efforts in accordance with the
NRC-approved plans with the following exceptions:
~ RLCA soils efforts defined by ITR-1 and subsequently ex-
panded by Staff comment
~ Certain RLCA efforts defined by ITRs-8 and -35
„ The RLCA efforts are to be completed by supplementing various subsec-
tions of this report and by the issuance of various ITRs.
Table 7.4-1 summarizes the status of the IOVP effort as of August 19,
1983. The first column identifies all portions of this IOVP FinalReport which must be supplemented at a later date to report completionof the IDVP effort defined by ITRs-8 and -35. The second column
provides a cross-reference to the PGandE Final Report sections which
report on the same subject, and is also useful in examining the OCP
status which is indexed in Table 7.3-1 through 7.3-6 by 'these numbers.
The third column of Table 7.4-1 identifies those EOI Files which per-tain to each of the incomplete subsections and which were unresolvedas of August 19, 1983.
IOVP'INAL7.4-1 REV 1
830818
~<
h-7
\ j y
L l
4
V
~ '
A TELEDYNEENQlNEERlNG SERV!GES
The fourth column of Table 7.4-1 identifies the ITR which will be
.issued to report the details of the IOVP work summarized in the listedIOVP Final Report subsection, as well as the future efforts requiredt'o complete the IOVP. These include ITRs-51, -54 -56, -59, -60, -61,-63, -65, and -68.. All other ITRs have been issued, except thatITRs-52 and -53 have been replaced by ITR-68, ITR-62 wi 11 be combined
with ITR-60, and ITRs-64 and -66 will be combined with ITR-63.
The last three columns of Table 7.4-1 summarize the status of IOVP
verification. In all cases, the IOVP verification program is thatcontained in'ither ITR-8 or -35. The column headings are
~ . "Field" - indicates the status of field verification, not'ncluding field verification of modifications.
e "Design" - indicates the status of verification of OCP de-
sign efforts.
e "Mod" - indicates the status of, IOVP field verification of'hysical modifications.
One of four terms (Yes, Part, No or NA) is entered in Table 7.4-1 to,I
summarize the IDVP status.
, o In the first of these last three columns: "Yes" means
that the IOVP has completed this field verification; "No"
means that IOVP field verification is planned, but not yet'completed; and, "NA" means that field verification is notapp 1 i cable.
a In the second of these last three columns: "Yes"means'hat
the IDVP has completed their design verificationeffort except, where applicable, the field verification ofmodifications; "Part" means that the IOVP has completed a
IOVPFINAL
7.4-2 REV 1
830818
><-TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
TABLE 7.4-1
STATUS OF INCOMPLETE VERIFICATIONS OEFINEO BY ITRS-8, -34, AND '-35
IOVP PGandE
-Re ort Subsections UnresolvedEOI s
I,TRNo.
Verification Com letelField ~Desi n, Nod
4.4.2.2
4.4.3
4.4.4
4.4.5
4.4.6
4.4.'8
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.1
2.1.1.4.3
2.1.5
2.1.4
1097
1092
1014
1014
10261028
55
57-1 NA
54 NA
51 Yes
58-1 Yes
56 Yes
Yes No
No No
No No
Yes NA
No No
Yes No NA
4.5.2.3a 2.2.1
4.5.2.3b 2.2.3
4.5.3.2a 2.2.2
4.5.3.2b 2;2.2
938109811381141
1098
10981141
10981142
59 Yes
60 Yes
61 Yes
60 Yes
Part
Part
Part
Part
No
No
No
4.6.2.2
4.6.3
4.6.4
4,6.5
4.6.6.3
4.6.6.5
2.3.1
2.3.1
2.3.1
2;3.1
2.3.3
2.5 1134
67-1 NA
67-1 NA
67-1 Yes
67-1 Yes
67-1 Yes
63 No
Yes
Part
Part
Part
Yes
Part
NA
IOVPFINAL lof 2
REV 1
830816
TABLE 7.4-1'Cont)
P0 TELEDYNEENGlNEERlNQ SERVICES
, IOVP PGandE
Re ort Subsections Unresolved ITREOIs No.
Verification Com lete?Field ~Desi n Mod
4.6.7
4.6.8.1b
2.3.2
2.4 983 63 Yes
67-1 Yes Yes
Yes No
4.6.8.2b 2.6 63 Yes Yes
4.6.9
4.9.1.4
4.9.2
= 4.9.3
2.3.2.3.3
NA
NA
NA"
NA
'865
Yes
No
67-1 Yes
67-1 NA
Yes
Yes
No
No
NA
IOVPFINAL 2of2
REV 1
830816
R
A TELEDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES
SECTION
8.0'EFERENCES
8.1 IDVP DOCUMENTATION
8.1.1 Teledyne Engineering Services
The following'TRs and Program Plans have been published by TeledyneEngineering Services, 130 Second Avenue, Waltham, Massachusetts.''
~ . Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Design Verific'ation ProgramManagement Plan Phase I, March 29; 1982.
~ Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Design Verification ProgramManagement Plan Phase II, June 18, 1982.
~ Diablo'anyon Nuclear Power Plant - Independent DesignVerification Program Adjunct Program for . Evaluation ofConstruction guality Assurance, November 1982.
ITR-2: Comnents on the R. F. Reedy, Inc., guality AssuranceAudit Report on Safety-Related Activities Performed by PacificGas and Electric Prior to June 1978.'
Revision 0, June 23, 1982
ITR-11: Pacific Gas and Electric - Westinghouse SeismicInterface Review.
~ ITR-40: Soils Repor t - Intake Sliding Resistance.Revision 0, March 9, 1983
I ITR-43: Heat Exchangers.
Revision 0, April 14, 1983
~ ITR-44: Shake Table Test Mounting Class 1E ElectricalEquipment.
, Revision 0, April 15, 1983
IDVPFINAL
8.1.2-2 REV 1830815
'I4I
N
><-TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
. ~
ITR-57 Review of DCP Activities Fuel HandlingBuilding.'evision
0,'ugust 1, 1983
ITR-58: Verification of DCP Activities Intake Structure.
Revision 0, August 8, 1983
ITR-67 Large and Small Bore Pipe Supports.
Revision 0, August 12, 1983
Preliminary Report 'n the Design Interface Review .of theSeismic Reverification Program,'ovember 12,': 1981,
Design Verification Program; Seismic Service-RelatedContracts Prior to June 1978.
Revision 0, December 3, 1981Revisi'on 1; February'27, 1982
~ Design Verification. Program. for Power Ascension - 'DiabloCanyon Nuclear Power Plant - Unit 1.
Revision 0,- January 9, 1982
4IDVPFINAL
8.1.2-3 REV 1'30815
<s TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
8.1.4 Stone .E Webster Engineering Corporation
The following ITRs and Program Plans have been published by Stone .5Webster Engineering Corporation, 245 Summer Street, Boston,Massachusetts.
ITR-14: Verification'f the Pressure, Temperature, Humidity,and Submergence Environments Used for Safety-.Related EquipmentSpecifications Outside Containment for Auxiliary FeedwaterSystem and Control Room Ventilation and Pressurization System.
Revision 0,'ecember 6, 1982Revision 1, May 9, 1983Revision 2, July 25, 1983
ITR-18: 'erification of the Fire Protection ProYided forAuxiliary Feedwater System, Control Room .Ventilation andPressurization System Safety-Related Portion of the 4160 V
Electric System.
Revision 0, December 13, 1982 .
Revision 1, May 24, 1983
~ ITR-19: 'Verification of the Post-LOCA Portion of theRadi ati on Environments Used for Safety-Related EquipmentSpecification Outside Containment for Auxiliary FeedwaterSystem and Control Room Ventilation and Pressurization System.
Revision 0, December 16, 1982
~ ITR.-20: = Verification of the Mechanical/Nuclear Design of the'ontrol Room .Ventilation and Pressurization System.
Revision 0, December 16, 1982Revision 1, April 20, 1983Revision 2, July 25, 1983
e .ITR-21: Verification of the Effects of High Energy LineCracks and Moderate Energy Line Breaks for Auxiliary FeedwaterSystem and Control Room Ventilation and Pressurization System.
Revision 0, December 15, 1982Revision 1, May 3, 1983
~ ITR-22: Verification of the Mechanical/Nuclear Portion of theAuxiliary Feedwater System.
Revision 0, December 17, 1982Revision 1, April 20, 1983Revision 2, July 25, 1983
'DVP
FINAL8.1.4-1 REV 1
830815
'E
P> TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVI|.-ES
~ ITR-23:, Verification of High Energy Line Break and InternallyGenerated Missile'eview Outside Containment for AuxiliaryFeedwater System and Control Room Ventilation and
Pressurization System.
Revision 0, December 20, 1982Revision 1,'May 27, 1983
o ITR-24: Veri'fication of the 4160 V Safety-Related ElectricalDistribution System.
Revis'ion 0, December 21, 1982Revision 1, May 4, 1983
~ ITR-25: Verification of the Auxiliary Feedwater SystemElectrical Design.
Revision 0, December 21, 1982Revision 1, April 29, 1983
~ ITR-26: Verification of the Control Room Ventilation and'Pressurization System Electrical Design.
Revision 0, December 21, 1982Revision 1, May 2, 1983
ITR-27: Verification of the Instrument and Control-Design ofthe Auxiliary Feedwater System.
Revision 0, December 23, 1982Revision 1, May 13, 1983Revision 2, July 25, 1983
ITR-28: Verification of the Instrument and Control Design'fthe Control Room Ventilation and Pressurization System.
Revision 0, December 23, 1982Revision 1, May 13, 1983Revision 2, July 25,. 1983
o ITR-29: Design Chain — Initial Sample.
Revision 0,. January 17, 1983
ITR-34: Verification of DCP Efforts by Stone 5 WebsterEngineering Corporati on.
Revision 0, February 4, 1983Revision 1, March 24, 1983
~ ITR-36: Final Report on Construction guality Assurance, Evaluation .of G. F. Atkinson.
- Revision 0, February 25, 1983Revision 1, June 20, 1983
IDVPFINAL
8.1.4'-2 REV 1830815
4
A TELEDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES
e ITR-38:, Final Report on Construction equality AssuranceEvaluation of Wismer 5 Becker.
Revision 0, March 1, 1983Revision 1, March 16, 1983Revision 2, June 20, 1983
~ ITR-45: Additional Verification of Redundancy of Equipmentand Power Supplies in Shared Safety-Related Systems.
Revision 0, May 17, 1983
e ITR-46: Additional Verification of Selection of System DesignPressure and Temperature and Differential Pressure AcrossPower-Operated Valves.
Revision 0, June 27, 1983
~ ITR-47: Additional Verification of EnvironmentalConsequences of Postulated Pipe Ruptures Outside ofContainment.
~ ITR-49: Additional Verification of Circuit Separation andSingle Failure Review of Safety-Related Electrical Equipment.
Revision 0, June 23, 1983
IDVPFINAL
8.1.4-3 REV 1830815
H
1
I
I<-TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
8.2 OPEN MEETINGS
8.2.1 NRC Meetings (Transcribed)
The following meetings were transcribed. The date of the meeting and theattendees are listed.
October 9, 1981, Nuclear Regulatory Coranission and. Pacific Gas and
Electric Company.
February 3, 1982, Nuclear Regulatory Comnission, Pacific Gas and
Electric Compahy, Teledyne Engineering Services, Robert L. CloudAssociates, and Stone 8 Webster Engineering Corporation.
March 25, 1982, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Pacific Gas and ElectricCompany, Teledyne Engineering Services, Robert L. Cloud Associates,Stone 8 Webster Engineering Corporation, and Roger F. Reedy, Inc.
April 1, 1982, Nuclear Regulatory Comnission, Pacific Gas and ElectricCompany, Teledyne Engineering Services, Robert L. Cloud Associates,
'ogerF. Reedy, Inc., and Stone 8 Webster Engineering Corporation..
June 10, 1982, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Diablo Canyon Project,, Teledyne'ngineering Services, Robert L. Cloud Associates, and Roger F.Reedy, Inc.
July 27,. 1982, Nuclear Regulatory Cormission, Diablo Canyon Project,Teledyne Engineering Services, Robert L. Cloud Associates, andBrookhaven National Laboratories.
August 6, 1982, Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Pacific Gas and ElectricCompany, Teledyne Engineering Services, Robert L. 'loud Associates,Roger F. Reedy, Inc., Stone 8 Webster Engineering Corporation, andDesignated Other Parties.
September 1, 1982, Nuclear Regulatory Coomission, Pacific Gas andElectric Company, Teledyne Engineering Services, Robert L. CloudAssociates, Roger F. Reedy, Inc,, Stone 8 Webster EngineeringCorporation, Designated Other Parties, and Brookhaven NationalLaboratories.
October 19, 1982, Nuclear Regulatory Comnission, Diablo Canyon Project,Teledyne Engineering Services, Robert L. Cloud Associates, and Stone 8
Webster, Engineering Corporation.
October 20, 1982. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
IDVPFINAL
8.2.1-1 REV 1
830815
-><-TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
Nov'ember 10, 1982, Nuclear Regulatory Conmission and Designated OtherParties:,
\
December 8, 1982, Nuclear Regulatory Coranission.
December 21, 1982, Nuclear Regulatory Commission,'. Diablo Canyon Project,. Teledyne Engineering Services, Brookhaven National Laboratories, and'estinghouse.
January 13, 1983, Nuclear Regulatory Coranission, Diablo Canyon Project,Teledyne Engineering Services, Robert L. Cloud Associates, Roger F.Reedy, Inc., and Designated Other Parties.
January 28, 1983,* Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Diablo Canyon Project,Teledyne Engineer i'ng Services, Stone 8 Webster Engineering Corporation,
, and Westinghouse.
February 15, 1983, Nuclear Regulatory Comnission, Diablo Canyon Project,Teledyne Engineering Services, Robert L. Cloud Associates, DesignatedOther Parties, .and Brookhaven'ational Laboratories.
Nay 4, 1983, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Pacific Gas and ElectricCompany, Teledyne Engineer.ing Services, and Designated Other Parties.
May 20, 1983, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Teledyne EngineeringServices', Stone 8 Webster Engineering Corporation, Designated Other.Parties, and Westinghouse.
May 21, 1983, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Teledyne EngineeringServ'ices, Stone 5 Webster Engineering Corporation, Designated . OtherParties, and Westinghouse.
June 17, '983, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Robert L. CloudAssociates, Diablo Canyon Project, Brookhaven National. Laboratories andDesignated Other Parties.
July 6, 1983, Nuclear .Regulatory Coranission, Diablo Canyon Project,Teledyne Engineering Services, Brookhaven National Laboratories.
July 14, 1983,'uclear Regulatory Coranission, Pacific Gas and ElectricCompany, and Designated Other Parties.
August 10, 1983, Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Diablo Canyon Project,Teledyne Engineering Services, Robert L. Cloud Associates, andDesignated Other Parties.
I
IDVPFINAL
,8.2.1-2 REV 1830815
P> TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
8.2.2 Other "Open" Meetings.
November 12, 1982, Nuclear Regulatory Comnission, Diablo Canyon Project,Teledyne Engineering Services, Robert L. Cloud Associates, and
* Brookhaven National Laboratories.
December 9, 1982, Nuclear Regulatory Comoission, Pacific Gas andElectric Company, Teledyne Engineering Services, and Robert L. CloudAssociates.
December 14-15, 1982, Nuclear Regulatory Coranission, Diablo Canyon'roject,Teledyne Engineering Services, and Robert L. Cloud Associates.
December 20; 1982, Nuc.lear Regulatory Comnission, Diablo Canyon Project,Tele'dyne Engineering Services, and Roger F. Reedy, Inc.
February 4, 1983, Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Diablo Canyon Project,.Teledyne Engi'neering Services, Robert. L. Cloud Associates, Roger F.Reedy, Inc'., Stone,E Webster Engineering Corporation, and BrookhavenNational Laboratories.
February 14, 1983, Nuclear Regulatory Comoission and Brookhaven National'Laboratories.
April 21, 1983., Nuclear Regulatory Coomission, Diablo Canyon Project,Teledyne - Engineering Services, Robert L. Cloud Associates, Roger F.Reedy, Inc., and Stone 8 Webster Engineering Corporation.
April 25-26, 1983, Nuclear Regulatory Coranission, Diablo Canyon Project,-Teledyne Engineering Services, Stone 5 Webster Engineering Corporation,and Designated Other Parties.
. April 26-27, 1983, Nuclear Regulatory Conmission, Diablo Canyon Project,Teledyne Engineering Services, and Robert L. Cloud Associates. '
April 27-28, 1983, Nuclear Regulatory Comnission, Diablo Canyon Project,Teledyne Engineering Services, and Robert L. Cloud Associates.
May 12, 1983,'uclear- Regulatory Comnission, Diablo Canyon Project,Teledyne Engineering . Services, Robert L. Cloud Associates, Roger F.Reedy, Inc.,'tone 8 Webster Engineering Corporation, and. DesignatedOther Parties (as Observers).
June 17, 1983, Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Pacific Gas and ElectricCompany, Teledyne Engineering Services, Robert L. Cloud Associates, andBrookhaven National Laboratories.
IDVPFINAL
8.2.2-1' REV 1830815
<> TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
July 21, 1983, Nuclear Regulatory Comnission, Diablo Canyon Project,Teledyne Engineering Services, and Robert L. Cloud Associates.
July 27, 1983, Diablo Canyon Project, Teledyne Engineering Services, andRobert L. Cloud Associates.
IDVPFINAL
8.2.2-2REV 1830815
REVs 0 LATEST REVo AC'ZION PGZEREV 1
830817 0.3-5
'
s
FILE NOs
938CONNEHTo
938COHNFHTt
938CIIENTo
DATE BASIS REV DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUB JECT
CONNEHTo ISO 446544 REVoil SHOMS SUPPORT 73/72R TO BE ACTIVE IH K"S DIRECTZOH OHLYf FIELD IHSPECTIOH SHOMS SUPPORT.TO BE ACTIVEIH BOTH'-S 1 E"M,DIRECTIOHSo
939 820120 FID 1 820519 RLCA PER/C TES RDF SUPTo 73"72R DIRECTIONs LINE 1988t AUXo BUILDINGoCONENTo RLCA 102 AHALYSIS SHOMED ALL STRESSES LESS THAH ALLOMABLE. PGZE AHALYSIS 8-25 SHOMS SUPPORT ACTIVE IN H"S DIRECTION NLY
939 820120 FID . 2 820621 TES ER/C PGZE RDF SUPTs 73 72R DIRECTINo LINE 1988t AUX~ BUILDIHGs"CO}IEHTl ITR"it 3o2o4 t POTE LETTER DCVPWCA"74 DATED APRIL 23t 1982 ( RLCA FILE P105-4-939-006) oPGZE PZPIHG ANALYSIS 8-25 .
(RLCA FILE P105-4-432)sRLCA PIPING ANALYSIS RLCA 102o SUPPORT ACTIVE IH THE H-S 1 E-M DIRECTIOH'LL PIPE STRESSES LESSTHAN ALLOMABLESo
939 820f20 FZD 3 820708'ES CR HONE RDF HO SUPTo 73-72R DZRECTZONo LINE 1988t AUXo BUILDINGCONNENTo SUPTo 73/72R N CVC ISO 446544 Ril AND DESIGH AKALYSIS 8-25 IS SKOMH AS X-DIR SUPPORTo FIELD IHSPECTIOH
INDICATED SUPTo IH X-I DIRECTIOHo RLCA 102 ANALYSIS SKOMS STRESSES LESS TKAH ALLOMABLEo PGZE LETTER DCVP-RLCA-74 (820423AGREES MITH FIELD IHSPECTZOKo ERROR CLASS Co HO PHYs HODSo PER POTE RESOLUTIOH SKEET 820701 s
940 820120 FID 0 820120 RLCA OZR RLCA RDF LIHE 103 DINEHSIOHo TURBIHE BUILDIHGoCONHEKTo ISO I49316 REVs3 SHOMS AS BUILT LENGTH OF LIHE 103 SOUTH OF SUPPORTS 18/2R 1 18/12SL AS 15 FTt6 IHCKES ~ RLCA FIELD
INSPECTION SHOMED DINEHSIOH AS 6 FTo
940 820120 FID 1 820510 RLCA PER/C TES RDF . LINE 103 DZHEHSIOHo TURBINE BUILDIHGoCONNEHT's THE DESIGN ANALYSES 4"2 1 4-3 DO HOT SAOM CORRECT DZMEHSIOH'PIPE STRESSES IH RLCA f02 ANALYSIS DO HOT EXCEED ALLOMABLE
940 '20120 F ID 2 820619 TES ER/C PGiE RDF LIHE 103 DINEHSIOH. TURBIHE BUILDINGCONIEHTl ITR-ft 3s2oh t PGZE LTR DCVP-I.CA-80 (5/2/82) (RLCA FILE P105-4"940-003) oPIPIHG'SO 449316t REVo03 ( RLCA FILE ". Qgf-f-45@PGfg QPgPG ANAL(SIS 4-2 (R(,CA FILE Pf05-4-432).! 4-3(RLCA FILE P105-4-432).RLCA PIPING ANALYSIS RLCA 104U ER H 5 7J (RL A FILE P105-4-521"045) ALL STRESSES LESS THAN ALLOMABLE DIN DIFF ,EXCEED 79-14 TOLERANCE.
I
C
I
ftEV 1
'30817.'.3-9V
REV» 0 LATEST REV» ACTION POTE
FILE NO. DATE BASIS REV» . DAlE BY 'TATUS ORO TES NODS SUBJECT
FID 7 820701 TES CR HOHE JCT YES . VALVE FCV 95 PLATE THICKHESS» AUX» BUILDIHG»FIELD INSPECTION SHOMS UNDERSIZE PLATE IHSTALLED ON FCV-'95» DCO-G+876 REQUIRES'1/2 INCH PLATE» 3/8IHCH PLATE IHSTALLED» PHYSICAL NOD ~ PER PGRE CONPLETIOH SHEET 820713 CORRECTED DISCREPENCY» ER/Ct ALL SlRESSESBELOM ALLOMABLE METH OR MITHOUT NOD»
820128. FID 8 830422 TES OIR RLCA JCT YES UALVE FCV 95 PLATE THICKHESS» AUX» BUILDIHG»NODIFICATIOH OF 1/2'TIFFENER PLATE TO VALUE FCV-37 PER DCO-G+876 HOT INPLENENTED» FIELD OBSERVED TO HAVE
3/8'LATES»OICERHED DESIGH AHALYSES FOR THESE VALUES NAY.HOT REFLECT AS-BUIlT COHDITIOH» RLCA TO REUEEM AND PROUIDERECONNENDATIOH FOR FUTURE DISPOSITIOH»
820128 FID 9 830429 RLCA PPRR/OIP TES JCT YES UALUE FCU 95 PLATE THICKHESS» AUX» BUILDING»DURIHG FIELD VERIFICATIOH BY IDVP FOR OTHER EQUIPNENTt OBSERVATION THAT FCV-37 STIFFHER PLATES MERE3/8'OT 1/2'ER DCO-G-N-876» DESIGH AHALYSES FOR TkkESE VALUES NAY HOT REFLECT AS-BUILT» PGSE TO
REEXANIHE AS"BUILT AHD RESPOND»
820128 FID 10 830504 TES PRR/OIP PGEE JCT YES VALVE FCV 95 PLAlE THICKHESS ~ AUX~ BUILDIHG»"'URIHGFIELD VERIFICATIOH BY IDVP FOR OTHER EQUIPNEHTt OBSERUATIOH THAT FCV-37 STIFFHER. PLATES MERE
3/O'OT 1/2'ER DCO<-N-876» DESIGkt ANALYSES FOR THESE VALVES NAY HOT REFLECT AS-BUELT» POTE TOREEXANIHE AS-BUILT AHD RESPOHD»
820128 FID 11 830608 TES OIR RLCA JCT YES VALUE FCU 95 PLATE THICKHESS» 'AUX~ BUILDIHG»DESIGH ANALYSIS FOR THESE VALVES NAY HOT REFLECT AS-BUILT COHDITIOHS» TES REQUESTS RLCA TO VERIFY THAT 1/2'LATESHAVE BEEN IHSTALLED ON THE SEVEN VALVES,INCLUDED IH DCO-G-N-876»
820128' ID 12 830712 RLCA PPRR/Cl TES JCT YES VALVE FCV. 95 PLATE THICKNESS» AUX» BU1LDING.Rft:EH? RLCA FIELD VERIFICATIOH SHOMS ALL VALUES SPECIFIED IN DCO-G-N-876 AS HAVING 1/2'HICK STIFFHER PLATES IHSTALLEDTO kkOkk FCFLFCT THE DESIGkl CONDITIONS PER THE Dk:O.
950"
820} "8 FE[t }3 "8307}5 TES F'RR/Cl fES JCT YES VALVE FCU 9S PLATE THICKNESS. AUX BUILDINGCPNNENT, 'RECEnT RLCA FIELD VERIFICATION SHOMS ALL UALVES SPFCIFIEE'H DCO-G.-N-876 AS HAVING 1/2'HICK STEFFMER PLATES IHSTA'LLEP
TO HOM REFLECT lHE DESIGH CONDITIONS PER THE DCO,
'50 82012S FID }4 8307}5 TES CR NONE JCT YES VALUE FCV 95 PLATE THICKHESS. AUX, BUILDING,CONMEkkll NODIFECATION OF }/2'TIFFENER 'PLATE 10 VALUE FCV"37 PER DCO-8+876 HOT INPLENEHTED FIELD OBSERVED TO KAUE 3/8'LAlES
COHCERkt THAT D A, FOR VALVES NAY NOT REFLECT AS-BUILT CONDITION RECENT RLCA FIELD VERIFICATION SNOMS ALL VALVES SPEC-EFEFD EH DCO-G-N-876 AS tkAVENG }/O'HICK STEFFHER PLATES INSTALLED TO NOU REFLECT THE DESIGN COktDI?EOH MAS ER/C. CE
951 820129 FID 0 '20129 RLCA OIR RLCA RDF SUPT» 1-27 LOCATIOH»LIHE 593t AUX» BUILDIHG»CONNEHTl AUXILIARYFEEDMATER ISO 445878 REV.14 LOCATIOH OF SUPPORT'1/27R DISAGREES MITH FIELD INSPECTIOH LOCATION. ISO SkkOMS
DINEHSION AS 9'NCHES FRON ELBOM» RLCA FIELD IHSPECTIOH SHOMED 35 IHCHES FRON ELBOM»
951 820129 FID 2 820417 TES PRR/DEV PGEE RDF SUPT» 1 27, LOCATION»LIHE 593t AUX» BUILDIHG»CONNEH? l POTE PIPIHG ISO 445878r REV 14 i PGEE PIPEHG AHAl.YSIS 2-17 DATED 5/7/82 EHFORHA?IOH IHCORREC? OH ISO FIELD AGREESMITH DESIGH ANALYSIS MITHIH 79-14 TOLERAHCES, »
951~
820129 FID 3 820524 TES CR HOHE RDF HO SUPT» 1 27 LOCATION»LIHE S93t AUX» BUILDIHG~CONNEHT} SUPPORT 1/27R IS SkkOMH OH AUX» FEEDMATER ISO 445878 REV»14 TO BE LOCATED 9 IHCHES FRON THE ELBOM»RLCA FIELD IHSPEC?IOHSHOMED THIS SUPPORT TO BE LOCATED 35 INCHES FROM THE ELBOM» DESIGN AHALYSIS 2-0 (820507) SHOMS'SUPPORT 1/27R TO BELOCATED 33 '1/4'RON ELBOM CMITHIH 79-14 TOLERANCE) DEVIATIOH» HO PHY» NODS» PER PGEE CONPLETIOH SHEET" 820521»
e
REV, 0 LATEST REVo ACTION PGIEREV 1
('30'(l 7 I>. 3-19
FILE HOo
982CONNEHTo
DATE BASIS REVo DATE BY STATUS ORG lES NODS SUBJECT
CONIIENTl RI,CR TO REVIEM THE DCP CGNPLETION PACKAGES AND SURNIT A POTEHTIAL RESOLUTIGN OR ERROR REPORT TO THE PROGRAN NANAGER
983CONNEHTo'' 0SPACE RESERVED FOR LAlER REVISION
983 0 . 5 '0CONNENT ~ SPACE RESERVED FOR LATER REVISIOHo
'83 0 6 0CONNENTo SPACE RESERVED FOR LATER REVISIOHo
984 820206 DND 0 820206 RLCA OIR RLCA RDC TURB BLDG IHTERFACE PROCEDURESCONNEHTI THE POTE DESIGN REVIEM IS PRESEHTED IH THE REPORT 'NOSGRI DESIGH VERIFICATIOH - TIWBIHE BUILDING'tFEBRUARYt1980 (LOG 7) o
SIHCE THE DESIGN REVIEM DID HOT VERIFY THE INTERFACE PROCEDURES BETIKEH URS/BLUNEt PORE AHD THE FIELD (FIG. 4-10-2t URS/BLUNE REPORT OH DESIGN REVIEMt LOG 7) t THESE MILL BE INVESTIGATED o
FILE'O 'ATE BASIS REV DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
1002 820206 SID'
820623 TES PRR/CI - TES CHK HO SUPPLY FANS S67r 68t i 69 IHPUTCIQKHTT RLCA HAS REVIEMED CALCULATIONS ATTACHED TO POTE ACTIOH IKET OF 820310 AND ALSO VERIFIED THAT HO
HODIFICATIONS HAVE BEEH HADE AS A RESULT OF THIS FILES
6002 820206 S!0 5 820622 TES CR HsllE CHH HO SOPPLY PSHS S670 68 I 60 IIIPOTCIIEHTP RLCA PRELININARY REPNT OF 811112 NOTED CALC'S FOR FAHS USED UNCOHSERVATIVE SEISNIC IHPUTS ERIN Bs
POTE'PROVIDED NEM CALCS MITH PROPER IHPUTSO'DVP VERIFIED NO NODIFICATION MADE AS RESULT OF THIS FILE»
1002 820206 SID " 6'30308 TES OIR RLCA M NO SUPPLY FANS S678 68 i 69 IHPUTCOIIEHTI BASED OH PGK RESPONSE AND RLCA VERIFICATIOH THAT HO NODS REQUIREDS RLCA SIILD CONSIDER ISSUIHG POTEHTIAL PROGRAN
RESOLUTIOH REPORT MHERE ER/B IS DOMHGRADED TO ER/C AHD FILE CLOSE9 OUT REFER TO PAR 5. 1 2 OF 8301 IDVP SN FOR
SEISNIC DEFINITION BECAUSE GRAVITY MAS HOT ADDED TO VERTICAL ACCELERATIONP STRESS CALCS USING CO)RECT SEISNIC INPUTSAND DEFIHITIONS DIDH'T EXCEED ALLOMABLESP DOMHGRADED FROH ER/Bs
1002 820206 SID 8 830322 TES ER/C PGIE CHK NO 'UPPLY FANS S670 68 1 69 IHPUTCONIKHTI CALCS-FOR SUPPLY FANS FOIID TO lSED IHCORRECT AHD UHCOHSERVATIHE SEISNIC INPUTS ALSOS GRAVITY HOT ADDED FOR SEISNIC-
CONSIDERATIOHS OF FORCED DRAFT SmlTTER DANPER IIALs CALC STRESSES USIHG CURRENT SEISNIC IHPUTS AHD DEFINITIONS DIDH'TEXCEED ALLOMABLESS ER/B ESTABLISHED BY REVs 1 TO THIS FILE IS MIHGRADEDs
1002 820206 SID, 9 830322 TES CR HONE CHK HO SUPPLY FANS S67r 68 1 69 INPUTCOIKHTl CALCS FOR SUPPLY FANS. FIND TO USED INCORRECT AHD IICOHSERVATIHE SEISMIC INPUTS ALSOS GRAVITY HOT ADDED FOR SEISHIC
COHSIDERATIOHS OF FORCED DRAFT SIITTER DANPER QUALS CALC STRESSES USIHG CNREHT SEISNIC IHPUTS AHD DEFIHITIONS DIDN'EXCEED ALLOMABLES ER/B ESTABLISHED BY REV 1 TO THIS FILF. IS DOMHGRADED TO AH ER/C
1003 820206 OD 0 820206 RLCA OIR RLCA RCM 4KV SM RN HVAC DUCT SUPTICIQKHTI HOSGRI DUCT SUPPORT QUALIFICATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN LOCATED AS OF 811028 TO,BE ADDRESSED BY PGIE 1 REVIEMED
BY RLCAO
1003 820206 OD 1 820607 RLCA PPRR/OIP TES RCM 4KV SM RN HVAC DUCT SUPTCONCKHTP PORE MILL SUPPI.Y THE ANALYSIS OF RECORD DATED PRIOR TO 811028
1003 820206 OD 2 820621 TES PRR/OIP PGK RCM 4 KV SM RN HVAC DUCT SUPT .
CIQKHTT PGK TO SUPPLY THE ANALYSIS OF RECORD DATED PRIOR TO 811028
1003 820206 OD 3 820823 TES OIR RLCA RCM 4 KV SM Rll HVAC DUCT SUPTCIQKHTO RLCA TO REVIEM AHD DISPOSITION ACCORDIHGLY THE POTE RESOLUTIOH 1
CONPLETIOH SHEETS t820615'003
820206 09 . 4 820825 RLCA PER/C TES RCM 4 KV SM RN HVAC DUCT SUPTCIIEHTI DUCT SUPPORT CALCSO DATED PRIOR TO 811028 DO HOT QUALIFY SUPPORT FOR
AREA A (TURBINE BUILDING)SDUCT SUPPORT MAS HOT EVALUATED FORHOSGRI 0
1003, 820206 09, 5'21005 TES ER/AB PGIE RCM YES HVAC DUCT SUPPORT REEVALUATIOHCOCIEHTI REVS 4 MAS A PER/Cs BASED OH 820917 SUBNITTAL OF DCP PHASE 1 FINAL REPORT IH MHICH DCP HAS'TATED THAT INAC'SUPPORTS
ARE BEIHG REAXALYZEDr IDVP PROGRAN REVIEM CONHITTEE OH 820929 DECIDED TO CHANGE THIS'TO AH ERROR/A OR Bs IDVP ALSODECIDED TO CONBIHE FILE 1077 MITH THIS FILEs
f053 fl;5206 'IID 5 835721 TEE: OfR RLCAS RCM HVAC DUCT SUPPORT REEVALUATIONCOHCIEHTl TTASFD OCC I[61'P VERIPICATEOH EFFORT OF CAF'O DATE lITUP HAS ONLY ONE UNRESOLVED ISSUE EOI 1134t ICHICH Mll,l. BEHE<CYl.VFFS 9F'f'ARATELY. fll.f'A TO REVIEW ACID fifSOLVE FILE 10037 MITH EXCEPT10H OF EOI 1134 ISSUEt 1F POSSIBLE,
'
1053 8.0ZG*5 OD 7 830722 RLCA PF'RR/el TES RCM HVAC 5UCT SUPPORT REEVALUATIONCCOCIHEHTl IDVP IIAS VERIFTED THAT MITH THE EXCEPTION OF SPECIFIC ITEN DETAILED IH EOI 11342 MHICH MILL BE RESOLVED SEPARATELYCAP FOR HVAC Duer ACID SUF'PORTS IS AN ACCEPTABLE AHD PROPERLY IHPLEHEHTED PROGRAH FOR RESOLUTIOH OF EOI 1003
1003,25756 Of( 8 830801 TES PER/CI TES RCM HVAC DUCT SUPPORT REEVALUATIOClCOWFHTl TIK IDVP HAS VERTFIED THAT EXCEPT FOR TSSUE ICC EOI l}348 THE CAP FOR HVAC DUCT AHV SUPPORT$ 1S AN ACCEPTABLE AHD .~ PROPFRLY IHF'LEHFHTED PFOGRAH FOR RESOLUTIOH OF EOI 1003 EOI 1134 MILL RE RESOLVED SEPARATELY
CONEKTI PG2E TO ASSEMBLE 2 CONTROL SPECTRA AND NECK QUALIFICATIOHS AGAINST THIS SPECTRA<
1004 &20206 OD 3 820524 TES OIR RLCA RM PG2E-MESTIHGHOUSE SE ISNIC IHTERFACE,. COINEHTt PG2E RESOLUTIOH SHT< 820521 MITH IHDEX OF HOSGRI SPECTRA RECEIVED BY MESTIHGHOUSE FROM PGIE< PGIE TRAHSNI'fTED
70 TES DOCUNEtfTATIOH THAT CONFIRMED THIS IHDEX< MESTIHGHOUSE AUDIT OH 820507 BY IDVP.
1004 820206 OD 4 820609, RLCA PPRR/Ci TES RM P&2E-MESTIHGHOIISE SEISMIC IHTERFACE.,CONNEHT< BASED ON P&2E TRANSMITTAL DCVP-TES"72 AHD THE IDVP MESTIHGHOUSE AUDIT OH 820507t TES IHFORMED RLCA TNT SEISMIC
INTERFACE BETMEEH P02E AHD MESTINGISUSE IS VERIFIED.
k
, 1004 820206 OD 5 820622 TES PRR/CI TES RM PG2P7ESTIHGIIOUSE SEISNIC INTERFACECONNQTt BASED OH PG2E TRAHSNITTAL DCVP"TES"72 AHD THE IDVP MESTIHGHOUSE AUDIT OH 820507
TES COHCLUDED TNT THE SEISNIC IHTERFACE BFTMEEH PGIE AHD MESTINGHOUSE IS VERIFIED<
'004
820206 OD 6 820622 TES CR HOHE RM HO PGIE-UESTIHGHOUSE SEISNIC INTERFACE<CONIIEHTI ELECTRICAL EQUIPNEHT AND INSTRUMENTATION< CONCERN ADDRESSED IHSUFFICIENT TRANSNITTAL OF SEISMIC IHFORMATIOH FROM P&2E,
TO M< BASED ON PGIE TRANSMITTAL DCVP-TES"72 AND THE IDVP MESTIHGHOUSE AUDIT OH 820507r TES CONCLUDED THAT THE SEISNICINTERFACE BETMEEH PG2E AND MESTINGHOUSE IS VERIFIED.
1005 820206 OD 0 820206 RiCa OIR RLCA RRB MYLE LABS TRANSNITTAL OF 'SPECTRACONNENTI DIKUMEHTATIONREQUIRED REGARDING FORMAL TRANSMITTAL OF SPECTRA FROM PG2E TO MYLE LABS,
k
1005 820206 OD 1 820309 RLCA PPRR/CI TES RRB MYLE LABS TRAHSNITTAL OF SPECTRACONMEHTt HO DOCUNEHTATISI FOUND TO DATE REMDING FORNAL TRANSNITTAL OF SPECTRA BUT COHCERH COVERED BY EOI'S 1013 2 1049
k
1005 820206 OD 2 820417 TES CR KORE RRB HO MYLE LABS TRANSMITTAL OF SPECTRACONNENTI ALTHOUGH HO DOCUMENTATION OF FORMAL TRAHSNITTAL OF SPECTRA FRON PGIE TO MYLE HAS BEEH FOUND TO DA7Et THIS COHCERH IS
COVERED BY EOI'S 1013 5 1049<
1006 820206 OD''
0 820206 RLCA OIR RLCA CHK ELECTQUIP QUAL BY AHALYSISCONNEHTt FOR EQUIPMENT REQUIEM.IFIED BY ANALYSIS) AS IHDICATED BY HOTE 5 IH TABLE 10-1 OF HOSGRI~ HO IHFORNATION HAS BEEH
FOUHD TO'ATE AS TO MHO ND PERFORNED THESE AHALYSES< THIS IS BEING COVERED GENERICALLY BY RLCA IH THE CINEHTPRO&RAN<
1006 820206 OD 1 820309 RLCA PPRR/CI TES CHK .ELEC EQUIP QUAL BY ANALYSISCOINEHTt THE PNSE I PROGRAN INCLUDES TMO ELECTRICAL CABINETS QUALIFIE9 BY ANALYSIS<
k
~ 1006CONNEHTI
1007CONNEHTt
k
820206 . OD 2 820421 TES CR HONE CHK HO ~ ELEC EQUIP QUAL BY ANALYSISFOR EQUIPtIEHT REQUALIFIED BY ANALYSIS'S IHDICATED BY NOTE 5 IH, TABLE 10-1 OF HOSGRI) HO IHFORNATON HAS BEEHFOUND TO DATE AS TO Nm ND PERFORNED 7%SE ANALYSES< THE PHASE I PROGRAM INCLUDES TMO ELECTRICAI. CABIHETSQUALIFIED BY ANALYSIS<
820206 SID 0 820206 RLCA OIR RLCA CHK ELEC EQUIP TRANSNITTAL OF INFOSHOULD FURTHER IHVESTIGATIOH FAIL TO SICOVER RECORDS THAT UNSATISFACTORILY DOCUMENT THE TRAHSFER OF SEISNICANALYSES MILL BE EXAMINED TO SEE IF APPLICABLE SEISNIC IINFORNATIOH MAS APPLIED<
REOUALIFICATIOH IHFQRNTION BETMEEH PG2E AND TIKIR CONSULTNfSr THE ACTUAL TEST SPECTRA AND 7HE REQUALIFICATION
REV 1
830817REV» 0 .LATEST REV» ACTIOH PG&E
FILE HO» DATE BASIS REV. DATE BY STATUS ORG TES INDS SUBJECT
1020 820218 SIR 2 820»17 TES PRR/SEII PRIE JCT ACE SALTNTER PREP PRELIS SPECT,IRTAEE STRSCI,
CNNEHT» PRELIIIIHARY SPECTRA IDENTICAL TO HOSGRI SPECTRA C(N'IRMEDr TES TRIP REPORT HO 14490
1020 820218 SID 3 820629 TES CR ~ HOME JCT NO 'UX SALTQATER PIN(P PRELIM SPECT»IHTAKE STRUCT»
CMSIT! UMCNTI(OLLED PRELIIIIHARY SPECTRA USED TO QINLIFY PUMPt PG&E FILE 11603t 771227» IDENTICAL'TO HOSBRI SPECTRAtPB&E
CNPLETIOM REPORT 820601o =DEVIATION»
1021CNNEHT(
1021COINEHT»
820218 OD 0 820218 RLCA OIR RLCA RDF CCNIX ANALYSIS AS RIGID ANCH(a» TURBINE BLDG»
OF 9 Hzo (H(NIZNTALAN VERTICAL) FOR THIS HX» THE INDELIHG OF A HOINIGID PIECE OF EQUIPHEHT AS A RIGID ANCHOR'HAY HOT
BE CONSERVATIVEi
820218 OD 1 . 820430 RLCA PPRR/OIP TES RDF CCNX ANALYSIS AS RIBID ANCHOR» TURBINE BLDG»
PER PB&E SEMI-NNTHLY OPEN ITEM $22- PB&E MILL EXAIIIHE THE RIGID %DELI}i OF THE CMIX IH THE PIPIIS ANALYSIS»
1021 820218 OD 2 820510 TES PRR/OIP PB&E RDF CCNX ANALYSIS AS RIGID AMCNR» TURBINE BLDG»
CNNEHTI ITR-1t 302»4 PG&E PIPIIN ANALYSIS 4-3 DATED 1/30/800 NSBRI REPORT TABLE 7"50 THE NATURAL FREQUENCY OF THE C(3 HEAT
EXCHANGER IS LESS THAM THE IIIHllRIIIREQUIREMENT FOR PIPING NDEL TERMINATIN» PG&E SHOULD EXAIIIME THIS PROBLEII»
1021 820218 OD 3 820910 TES OIR RLCA RDF CMIX ANLYSIS AS RIGID AMCHN» TURBINE BLDG»
C(NHEMTI BASED N PG&E PRESEHTATI(NS (AUGUST 681982 AHD AUGUST 2dr 1982) OF THEIR INTERNAL TECHNICAL PROGRAM OF PIPIHOr TES AMD
RLCA MILL RECNSIDER COMBININ THIS FILE HITH FILES 9618105881059 & 1098 IHTO NE ERROR CLASS A OR B FILE» .
'I
1021 820218 OD 4 820913 RLCA PPRR/CI TES RDF CCMIIX ANALYSIS AS RIGID ACHOR TURBINE BLDG
CNNENTI BASED N.PG'&E PRESEHTATIO»5 (AUG 6 OD AUG 26t 1982) OF THEIR INTERNAL TECINICAL PROGRAM OF PIPIHGtTHIS FILE COININED MITH FILES 9618 10588 10598 AN 1098 IHTO NE ERROR CLASS A OR B FILE» SEE
FILE 1098 FOR. ERROR REPORT»
1021 820218 OD .5 820921 TES PRR/CI TES RDF CNHX ASLYSIS AS RIGID AHCINR» TINBIHE BLDG»
COINEMTI"PG&E PIPIN NALYSIS 4-3(800130)t HOSGRI REPORT TABLE 7-50 THE NATURAL FREQUENCY OF THE CCM HEAT EXCHAINER IS LESS'HAH
THE HIHINN REQUIREMENT OF PIPING INDEL TERHINATIOH THIS FILE HAS BEEH CNBIMED IHTO FILE 1098 AHD
HAS BEEN DESIGNATED AS ERROR A/Bo
1021 820218 OD 6 820921 TES CR MOHE RDF NO CCNN ANALYSIS AS RIGID ANCHORS TURBINE BLIRG»
COINEHTI PG&E PIPING ANAL $4-3(REV 16r3/4/80)REPRESEHTS THE COlPOXEHT COOLING MATER HEAT EXCH» AS A.RIGID AMNOR» THE HQSGRI RPT»
(TABLE 7-5)LISTS NATURAL FREQ OF 9 HERTZ(HORIZ & VERT)FOR THIS HEAT EXCH THE HODELIHG OF A H(NRIBID PIECE OF EQUIP AS
A RIGID AHCH(N HAY NOT BE COHSERVATIVE» THIS FILE CNB»IHTO FILE 1098 & DESIGNATED'S ERROR A/Bo
1022 820218 SID 4 820907 RLCA PER/AB TES RX IHTAKE STRUCTURE REENLUATIN»COIQIENTI REANALYSIS OF INTAKE STRUCTURE PERFORMED BY PG&Er 820806 & 8209010 COINIHE THIS ITEN HITH EOI 967 & 9880
J
1022 8.0?18 BID 5 820910 TES ER/AIT PG&E RDC IHTAKE STRUCTURE REEVALUATIONCOHNENTl SPECTRA AT 2 I'SED 8'-9'PECTRA APPLICABLE AT A LEVEL TEH FEET RELOM UPPER PUIIP SUPPORT MERE USEDI HOT CONSERVATIVE
INTAKE STRUCTURE IH REANALYSIS IH PG&E INTERNAL TECHIIICRL PROGRAM COMBINE EOI 967 & 988 IH TO 1022
REUO 0 LATEST REV ~ ACTION POlEREV 1
830817 o.3-34
FILF. HOP
1022C{NHENTI
DATE BASIS REVO DATE BY STATUS
820218 . STD 6 830723 TES OIR
UPPER AUX SRLT MATER PUHP SUPPORT LOCATED10''UNPMYPT. SPECTRA NAY NOT 'O'E A~PL!CABLE.
ORO TES NODS SUBJECT
RLCA ROC INTAKE STRUCTURE REEVALUATIONS
ABOVE ELEVATION -"., 1'. SPECTRA FOR -". 1'SED AS INPUT FOR UPPER
RLCA TO RET'IEM KP <-,t%UATION OF INI4f SIR(ICTWI 'K!NG PERFORNED.
FILE REDEFIHED TO TRACK DCP RE-EVALUATION BEING PERFORNED AS PART OF CAP IDUP VERIFIED THAT UITH EXCEPTION OF
SOILS IIORK MHICH MILL 'RE RESOLVE9 SEPARATELYt CAP FOR INTAKE STRUCTURE IS AN ACCEPTABLE AND PROPERLY INPLEHEHTED
PROORAH FOR RESOLUTION OF THIS EOI,
820218 SID 9 830726 TES CR NONE RDC NO INTAKE STRUCTURE REEVALUATIONSUPPER AUX SALT MATER PUNP SUPPORT LOCATED IO'BOVE ELEVATIOII -201'0 SPECTRA FOR -20 1'SED AS INPUT FOR UPPER PJNP SUP
PORTo IDUP HAS VERIFIE9 THAT MITH EXCEPTION OF SOILS MORKT MNICH MILL RE RESOLVED SEPARATELY) CAP FOR IHTAKE STRUCTURE
IS All ACCEPTARLE AND PROPERLY INPLENENTE9 PROGRAN FOR RESOLUTION OF THIS EOI INCLUDES EOI'S 967 t 988. MAS AH ER/AB Cl
820219 OD 0 820219 RLCA OIR RLCA RDF 3'ALVE NCUNO LINES 577 t 5788 AUX. DLD&o
P&lE DMB 447119 REV 12 AND PIPII3 SCHEN 102003t SHEET 48 REV 9 REFERS TO ITEN 15 OH 102039 THIS ISO 102039 SHT
41t REV09 SNNS 3 IHO VELAN VALVE TO BE DESCRIBED ON mo 663317 52 ~ EN.Y 4 L 6 INo VELAH VALVES ARE DESCRIBEB NEREO
ITR-it 302oht RLCA TO REVIEM IHFORNATION SEHT BY PGK IN RESPONSE TO RLCA S 820414 REQUEST ~
'I
820219 OD ~ 4 820713 RLCA PPRR/Cl TES RDF 3'ALVE DOCUH» LINES 577 i 5788 AUXO BLDGO
,DELETE FRON ITR 1t 30204t RLCA NS REVIEMED THE INFORNATIOH REQUIRED TO NODEL THE AFM VALVEO
1023 &20219 OD 5 &2070 TES PN/CI TES RDF 3'ALVE DOCUN LINES 577' 578 AUX BLDG
CONNEHTt DC 66317 52 1 ~ DC6633i7 4 30 102003t SHEET It REV090 PB'I VALUE INVENTORY HOO 102039 ~ POTE PIPING ISO4471198REV0120 RLCA HAS RKEIVED THE INFORNATION REQUIRED TO NODEL THE AFM VALVEo
1023CONNEHTt
820219 OD 6 820717 TES CR 'et RDF HO 3 VALVE D(CNo LINES 577 L 578t AUXO BLDG ~
RLCA MAS HOT ABLE TO OBTAIH INFORNATION FOR A 3 IHO VELAH UALVEO THIS VALVE IS REFERED TO AS ITEN 15 OH
THE AUXo FM.ISO 447119 REV0120 THE REQUIRED VALVE DRAMIHG 663317"4"3 MAS LATER SEHT BY PGEE TO RLCA»
1024CONNEHTO
820220 FID 0 820220 RLCA OIR RLCA RDF PIPE SUPTO HONENOLINE 1917tAUX BUILDIHGOP&tE NAKEMTER ISO 4493178 REV03 HISLABELS SUPPORT 85S-40V AS 85S-40R»
1024 820220 FID 1 820520 RLCA PPRR/CI TES RDF PIPE SUPTO HONENOLIHE 1917t AUX BUILDIH&oCONNEHTt SEVERAL LINES ARE SUPPORTED BY THIS RESTRAINTt 5 RIGID AHD Ot(E BY A SPRING HANGERO
THIS ITEN MILL BE COVERED BY A REVIEM OF THE 79-14 PROSRANP
1024CONSENT/
1024COINENTt
820220 FID 2 820607 TES PRR/CI TES RDF PIPE SUPTO NONEH OLIHE 1917tAN RUILDIH&0PGiE PIPING ISO 449317t REV03 POLE DRAMIHG 049272t SHEETS 44544At45 THROUGH 4590SUPPORT DM IS LABELED 85S"40V(SPRING'HANGER) YET SUPPORT IS ACTUALLY A RIGID Y FOR LIHE 1917-4 SEVERAL LINES ARE SUPPORTED BY THIS RESTRAIHTI 5RIGIDLY'AHD (LE BY SPRING HANGEROTHIS ITEN MILL BE COVERED BY A REVIEM OF THE 79-14 PROGRANO
820220 FID '3 820607 TES CR NONE RDF HO PIPE SUPTo NONENOLINE 1917t AUX BUILDIHGPISO 449317 R3 SNNS SUPPORT 85S/40R (RIGID) 0 THE DESIGN ANALYSIS FOR, THIS SUPPORT IS LABELED 80S/40V (SPRIHG) 0
CmIFIRNS SUPPORT FUNCTIOHO CLOSED ITEHO
SEVERAL LIHES ARE SUPPORTFD BY THIS RESTRAII(Tt 5 RIGIDLY AHD ONE BY SPRIH&o DRAMIHG 049272 SNTO 44 44A 45A TNRU 45D0 0 1 t
REV 2830817 os 3-49REUs 0 'ATEST REUs ACTIOH PG!E
FILE HOo, - DATE BASIS REVo DATE ='Y STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
1068 820315 QAR 1'20524 TES CR HQHE HAR HO URS/BL(SE QA FIHDIHGSCOHHENTs HO QA PROGRAHt IH CONFORHAHCE MITH 10CFR50 APPEHDIX Bt MAS IHPLEHEHTEDt RESULTING IH LACK OF FORHAL DESIGN CONTRGLs
TO BE REPLACED BY EOI 3005s CLOSED ITEHs
1069COHHENT(
1069COHHEHTs
820315 FID 0 820315 RLCA OIR RLCR RDF VALVE LCV 113/115 UNSUPT AFM LINES 577/578 AUX BPG2E AFM ISO 447119r REVs12 SHOMS VALVES LCU 113 X 115 UHSUPPNTEDi RLCA FIELD INSPECTION C(X(FIRHED THISs PGiE ANALYSIS2-14t COHPUTER DATE 1/16/82 IHDICATES SUPPORTS HAVE BEEH ADDED TO UALVESs RLCA TO COHPLETE VERIFICATIOH BASEDOH ORIGINAL FIELD IHFORHATIOHt MITH SUBSEQUEHT CONSIDERATION OF REVISIOHSs
820315 FID 1 820426 RLCA PPRR/CI TES RDF VALVE LCV 113/115 INSUPTs AFM LIHES 577/578 RUXs BsPGiE COHFIRHED ADDITION OF HEM SUPPORTS TO VALVES AND PRQUIDED 1981 ANALYSIS, Eot 1071 REPORTS OVERSTRESS IH THIS PIPINGAHALYSISs
1069 820315 FID 2 820511 TES 'OIR RLCA RDF 'ALVE LCU 113/115 UNSUPTs AFM LINES 577/578 AUXs Bs"COHHEHT~ TES RECOHHEHDS THAT FILE 1069t REVo0t BE RESOLVED EXCLUSIVELY BASED OH THE REVIEM OF THE PGlE 1981 AHALYSISt
PG1E REASOHS FOR THE'CHANGES RND THE RDDITIOH OF THE HEM SUPPORTS TO VALVES LCV113 AHD.LCV115 RATHER THANCLOSED OUT RND TRAHSFERRED TO FILE 1071 FOR EVENTUAL RESOLUTIOHs
1069 820315 FID 3 820517 RLCA PER/A TES RDF VAI.VE LCV 113/115 UHSUPTs AFM LINES 577/578 AUXs BsCOHHEHTs LACK OF SUPPORTS:OH VALVE OPERATOR CAUSES OVERSTRESS IH RLCA PIPING ANALYSIS 109s PGtE IH PROCESS OF ADDING RlPPCRTSs
ADDITIONAL SUPPORTS TO BE FIELD VERIFIED BY RLCA RLCA 109 MAS'RERUN MITH SUPPORTS OH VALVE OPERATOR (K15YCVF) T() 8HOM. STRESSES BELOM ALLOMABLEs POE PIPING ANALYSIS 2-4 DATED 1-16-82 INDICATE SUPPORTS OH VALVE OPERATORs
1069 '820315 FID 4 820607 TES FR/A PGiE RDF VALUE LCU 113/115 INSUPTs AFM LINES 577/578 AUXs BsCOHHENT) PGKE PIPIHG. ISO 447119r R.12r PIPIHG ANALYSES 2-14 (7/26/77 4 1/16/82) s RLCA PIPING ANALYSIS RLCA 109 SEQs OS K15VFM3i K15YCVF (3/19/82 t 5/9/82) s PGiE LTRs DCVPWLCA-67 (4/23/82) s PGiE DISs 049264r SHEETS 157-,169o VERIFs ANALYSIS,FAILS
STRESS EQUATIONS DUE TO UHSUPo VALVE OPERATORS.s THE ADDIo OF SUPTs OH UALVE OPERATOR RESULTS IN ACCEPTABLE STRESSESs
1069 820315 7ID'5 820630 'TES ~ ER/A POTE RDF YES UALVE LCV 113/115 UNSUPT AFM LINES 577/578 AUX B~ COHHENTs POTE TO ADD SUPPORTS AHD TO ASK VALUE SUPPLIER FOR VALVE QUALIFICATIOH FOR SUPPORTS OH VALVE OPERATORs
~ 1069 . 820315 FID 6 830625 TES OIR . RLCA RDF YES VALVE LCV 113/115 UNSUPTo AFM LIHES 577/578 AUXs BsCQHHENT'CP COHPLETIOH SHEET DATED 830620 IHDICATED THAT SUPPORTS HAVE BEEH ADDED TO LCV-113 AND LCV-115 VALVE OPERATORS
QUALIFICATIONs
RND VALVES HAVE BEEH QUALIFIED MITH THE SUPPORTS RLCA TO VERIFY SUPPORT ADDITIOH AHD REVIEM DCP VALVE
1069 820315 FID 7 830712 "RLCR PPRR/CI TES RDF YES VALVE LCV 113/115'UNSUPT, AFM LINES 577/57(s AUX, B,COHHENTl DCP COHP 'SHEET DATED 830620 INDICATES THAT SUPPORTS HAVE BEEN ADDED TO LCV"113 RND LCV"115 UALVE OPERRTORS ANDVALVES KRVE BFEH QUALIFIED MITH SUPPORTS RLCR HAS FIELD VERIFIED ADDITION OF THESE SUPPORTS
s
1069 .
COHHENTt
1069COHHENTs
820315 FIB 8 '830715 TES PRR/CI 'fS RDF YES VALVE LCV 113/115 UNSUPT AFM LINES 577/578 AUXs BoDCP COHP SHEET DATED 830620 INDICATES THAT SUPPORTS HAVE BEEH ADDED TO LCV-113 AND LCV-115 VALVE OPERRTORS RNDVALUES HAVE BEEN QUALIFIED MITH SUPPORTS RLCA HRS FIELD VERIFIED ADDITIOH OF'HESE SUPPORTS
820315 FID .9 830715 TES CR NONE RDF YES 'ALUE LCU 113/115 UNSUPTs AFM LINES 577/578 RUX, B,PGXE RFM ISO 447119r R,2 SHOMS VALVES LCU-113 i 115 UNSUPPORTED DCP COHPLETIOH SHEET DATED 830620 INDICATED THAT .SUPPORTS HAUE BEEN ADDED TO LCV-113 AND LCV"115 VALVE OPERATORS AND VAL'VES HAVE BEEN QUALIFIED MITH SUPPORTS'+ALEHRS FIELD VERIFIED,ADDITION OF THESE SUPPORTS PREUIOUSLY AH ERROR CLASS R, CI.OSEDITEN,'PORTS' RLCA
C
1070.'OHHEHTs
01070
COHHEHTo
820315 DHD 0 820315 RLCA OIR RLCA RDC AUX, BLDG, HORIZONTAL SOlL SPRING CALC,RLCA DIFFERS FROH THE NS/BLUHE SOIL SPRING BY 501 ~
ITR-1t 3s 1 oh AUXILIARYBUILDIHG RLCA TO COHPLETE HCNEILL MORKs, THE HORIZONTAL SOIL SPRING INDEPEHBENTLY CALCULATED YB
DELETE FROH ITR-1 t 3sis4 RLCA RECOI(ENDS THAT THIS FILE BE COHBI}(E
DATE . BASIS REVo DATE BY STATUS ORG TES , NODS SUBJECT .
820714 ICD 5 820922 TES ER/AB POTE RDF PIPING REEVALUATINoBASED OH POTE PRESEHTATXONS OF THEIR TECHNICAL PROGRAM THIS FILE IS COMBINED QXTH FILES 9&it .1021 1058 10591060 AHD 1104 AS AH ERROR CLASS A OR Bo THE INCLUSIOH OF FILES 1060 ND 1104 INTO THIS FILE MAS ACHIEVED BY PRNfREVIEW'COMMITTEE ACTION o ALL CONCERHS OF THE ABOVE MEHTIONED FILES MILI. BE REVIEWED UNDER THIS FILEo
820714 ICD 6 830120 TES ER/AB PGLE RDF PIPING REEVALUATINo'ASEDOH PGLE PRESEHTo OF THEIR TECIOIICAL PROGRAMt THIS FILE IS COMBINED M/FILES 9&it 102it 1058ti059t1060 t 1104.AS AN
ER A/B THE IHCLUSION OF FILES 1060 AHD 1104 IHTO THIS FILE MAS ACHIEVED BY PRO(NAM REVIEW (mTTEE ACTIN ALL C(NCERNS
OF THE ABOVE MEHTIONED FILES MILL BE REVIEWED HEREo REV. 6 MAS ISSUED TO REFLECT XNCLUSI(N OF FILE 6001 o
820714 ICD 7 830225 TES ER/AB POTE RDF YES PIPZHG REEVALUATINoBASED ON POTE PRESEHT OF THEIR TECH PROGRAMt THIS FILE IS COMBINED Q/FILES 9&iti021 1058 1059 106041104 AS AN ER/A/B
'THE INCL OF FILES 1060 1 1104 IH70 THIS FILE MAS ACHIEVED BY PROB REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTINo ALL CNCERHS OF THE ABOVE ~,
FILES MILL BE REVIEMED HERE REV 6 MAS ISSUED TO'REFLECT INCL OF 6001 REV 7 ISSUED TO REFLECT IHCL OF 1115 1 6002
BASED OH PGLE PRESEHTo OF 7HEIR TECH'» PROGRAMt THIS FILE IS COMBINED'M/FILES 961t1021t1058t1059t1060 1 0
"THE INCL OF FILES 1060.1 1104 IHTO THIS FILE MAS ACHIEVED BY PROG REVIEW COM ACTZOHo ALL CONCERHS OF THE ABOVE
WILL BE REVIEMED HEREo REV 6 ISSUED TO REFLECT IHCL OF 6001o REV 7 ISSUED TO REFLECT IHCL OF 1115 1 &002 R
820714. ICD ' 830706 TES ER/AB PGXE RDF 'ES PIPING REEVALUATIONBASED ON POTE PRESENT OF THEIR TECH. PROGRAM THIS FILE ZS COMBINED M/FILES 961 1021 1058 1059t1060 1 1104 AS AN'ER/ABTHF. IHCL OF FILES 10&0 Z, 1104 INTO TH!S FILE MAS ACHIEVED BY PROG REVIEW COM ACTIOH, ALL CONCERNS OF THE ABOVE FILESMILL BE'FUZEMEII HERE'. REV 6 - ZHCL OF 6001. REU 7 ISSUED TO REFLECT IHCL OF 1115 1 6002, REU, 8 - 1126, REU,9 - 1137
0 10 0SPACE RESERVED FOR LATER REUISIONSo.
.'098 0 ii 0COMIIEHTt SPACE RESERUED FOR LATER REVISIONSo
1099 820804 FID 0 820804 RLCA OIR RLCA PPR COMPONENT COOLING MATER HEAT EXCHo TURBIHE BLDGoCO}fMEHTl DRAWING SHOWS 3/4'7IFFEHER PLATES N HORTH SIDE OF FIXED END SUPPORT) FIELD VERIFICATIN DOES NOT SHOU THESE PLATES
ON HX 4 1"2o
1099 820804 FID 1 820816 RI.CA PPRR/OIP - TES PPR Cm(PNEHT COOLING MATER HEAT EXCHo TUINIIK BLDGo,:COMMENT( PGK TO ESTABLISH GEOMo CONIDERED BY DESo AHALo T DETERHXHE REASOHS FOR DIFFEREI(CES BETWEEN SUPPORTSo
I
1099 820804 FID 2 820820 TES PRR/OZP PGZE PPR NO COMPONENT COOLING MATER HEAT EXCH" TNBXNE BZDGoCOMMENT» BASIS o TES REVIEW OF GEONo DIFFo M/ RLCAt REVIEW OF RLCA BASIS FOR FINDIHG (PGiE FILES) 1-REVIEW OF 1099-1 t.'TES
MEMO 820819. POTE TO ESTABLISH THE. SUPPORT CONFIGURATION REPRESEHTED BY THE DESIGN ANALYSIS AHD DETERNINE THE REASNSFOR THE.DIFFERENCES BETMEEH'THE TMO SUPPORTSo
1099 820804 FID 3 821104 .TES OIR RLCA PPR COPOHENT COOLING MATER HEAT EXCH TNBIHE BLDGCOMMEHTo RLCA AND TES.TO ASCERTAIH UALIDITYOF POTE COMPLETION SHEET AHD VERIFY THAT THE ADDED PLATES OF CCMIN 4 1-2 HAVE BEEN
DESIGNED FOR HOSGRIo DESIGN CALCSo FOR ALTERNATE 'SHEAR RESTRAIHT'NE BEEN FOUN XH PGKES RESPONSE TO TES RFZ 0108(DCVP " TES 418 DATED 821006)o
1099 - 820804 FID 4 830216 RLCA PPRR/DEV TES PPR COMP(NEHT COOLIHG MATER HEAT EXCH o TURBINE BLDGoCO)fMEHTol PGZE DRAWING 463683 REVo 6 SHSS 3/4 S71FFNER PLATES OH lmRTH SIDE OF FIXED SUPPORTo RLCA FIELD VERXFICATIN SHOMS
. NORTH SIDE OF FIXED EHD SUPPORT OF KX 1"2 DOESN'T IHCLUDE THESE. HX 1-1 DOES DESIGH ANALYSIS'HOT AFFECTED) Sll(PLIFIED. MODEL DOESH'7 IHCLUDE THESE PLATESo DRAWING HAS BEEH REVISEDo
1099 820804 FID . 5 830225 TES PRR/DEV TES PPR CNIPOHEHT COOLING MATER HEAT EXCHo TURBINE BLDGoCOMMEHTl PGCE DRAWING 463683 REV 6 SHOWS 3/4'TZFFHER PLATES OH HORTH SIDE OF FIXED SUPPORT RLCA FIELD VERIFICATINI SNNSNORTH SIDE OF FIXED EHD SUPPORT OF HX 1-2 DOESH'T IHCLUDE THESEo HX 1-1 DOESo DESIGH AHALYSIS HOT AFFECTEDt SIMPLIFIEDMODEL DOESM'7 INCLUDE THESE PLATESo DRAWING HAS BEEN REVISEDo
1099 '20804 FID 6 830225 TES CR H(NE PPR HO COIIPOHENT COOLXHG MATER HEAT EXCHo 7(WBINE BLDGoCOMMEHTo PGXE DRAQZHG 463683 REVo 6 SHOWS 3/4'TIFFHER PLATES OH NORTH SIDE OF FIXED SUPPORTo RLCA FIELD VERIFICATION SINUSHORTH SIDE OF FIXED EHD SUPPORT OF N 1"2 DOESH'7 INCLUDE THESE. HX 1-1 DOES DESIGN ANtLYSXS NOT AFFECTEDt SllfPLIFIEDMODEL MESH'7 XHCLUDE THESE PLATESo DRAWING HAS BEEH REVISEDo DEVIATIOHo
1100 820816 OD 0 -'20816 RLCA OIR RLCA RDC HLA SOIL REVIEW OUTDOOR MATER STNAGE TNKSCOMMENTl HLA FIELD LOG OF'ORIHG 4 il (820208) IHDICATES TMO FIREWATER TANKS I 7HERE SHOULD OHLY BE OHE FIREWATER TA@l
FILE HO, DATE BASIS REV, DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
1120 830322 FID 1 830322 RLCA PER/B TES CHK COHDEHSORS CR-35'Pl(ASE I DCP CORRECTIVE ACTIOH)~ -. ~ CONNEHTo'ESIGN ANALYSIS HV-4»1 SHOMS 3/4'XT» HOUSIHG NONTIHG BOLTS USED IH EARLIER EDS CALC» IDVP FIELD C}KCK SNNS BOLTS TO
BE 1/2'o IDVP FACTORED BOLT STRESS IH D»A» BY DIFFEREHCE IN BOLT SIZE (3/4'S» 1/2')o RESS.TNT BOLT STRESS EX(mALLOMABLE DCP HAS REVISED D R AS A RESULT OF {DVP FIELD VERIFICATIOH TO S)WM BOLT STRESS TO BE BELOM ALLOMRBLE
1120 830322 F ID 2 830405 TES ER/B . PG1E CHK CONDO(SORS CR-35 (PHASE I DCP (WCTIVE ACTION)COtlNEHTl DESIGN ANALYSIS SHOMS 3/4'XTERIOR HOUSIHG NOUNTIHG BOLTS USED IN EARLIER EDS CALC MERE ACCEPTED IN
PH I DCP CAP» IDVP FOUHD 1/2'OLTS AND FACTORED BOLT STRESS BY DIFFERENCE IH BOLT SIZE» STRESS
1120 830322 F ID, 3 830420 TES OIR RLCA 0(K CNSGRS CR-35 (PHASE I DCP C(NECTIVE ACTIN)CONNENTl RDVERSE EFFECT OF LOUR BOLT SIZE ON STRESS CONPEHSATED FOR BY It{CREASED NUNBER OF BOLTS AND OVERALL BOLT SPRCIN»
TES RECONNEHDS RLCA TO REVIEM THIS FILE At(9 COHSIDER DOMHGRADING IT FRON AH ER/B TO AH ER/Co
~ . 1120. 830322 FID 4 . 830429 RLCA PER/C TES CHK CONBENSORS CR-3S (PHASE I DCP CORRECTIVE ACTIN).CONNEHT ~ 'ORIGIHAL EDS CRLC SHOMED FOUR 3/4 SNHTING BOLTS» FIELD SHOMS 1/2 o NNEVERt ADVERSE EFFECT OF SNRLLER
BOLT SIZE CONPEHSATE BY ACTUAL FIELD CONFIGURATIN( (6 NOUNTIHGS AS OPPOSED TO 4 IH DESIGN ANALYSIS)'OMNGRADEDFRON ER/B TO ER/C SIHCE CRITERIA OR LINITS HAVEH'T BEEH EXCEEDED»
BOLT SIZE CONPEHSATE BY ACTUAL FIELD CONFIGURATION (6 teSTINGS AS OPPOSED TO 4 IH DESIGH ANALYSIS)DOMNGRADED FRON ER/9 TO ER/C SIHCE CRITERIA OR LINITS HAVEN'T BEEH EXCEEDED»
1120 830322 F ID ~ 6 830507 TES CR HONE CHK HO CONDEHSORS CR"35 (PHASE I DCP CORRECTIVE
ACTION�)
.CONNEHT» ORIGIHRL EDS CALC SHOMED FOUR 3/4'OUHTIHG BOLTS» FIELD SNNS 1/2'. HOMEVER't ADVERSE EFFECT OF SNALLERBOLT SIZE CONPEHSATE BY ACTUAL FIELD COHFIGURATIOH (6 NOU(TIHGS AS OPPOSED TO 4 IN DESIGN ANALYSIS)DOMNGRADED FRON ER/B TO ER/C SIHCE CRITERIA OR LINITS HAVEH'T BEEN EXCEEDED»
BASE BEAN» FIELD SHOMS 1/2'IRNETER» RLCA TO DETERNIHE SIGNIFICANCE» MILL BE EXRNINED M/1096,AND1120 FOR POSSIBLE GENERIC COHCERH RE»'VAC CGNPONENT HOLD DOMN BOLT SIZE»
1121 . 830506 FID 1 830608 'LCA PER/C TEG CHK BOLT SIZEt FILTER UNIT - 39»CONNEHT» DCP REVISED ANALYSIS S)tOMS BOL'TS TO NEET ALLOMABLES AND DESIGH CR'ITERIA» RESULT OF THIS EOlt 1096 AHD 1020t POSSIBLE
GENERIC CONCERHt EVEH THOUGH HO OVERSTRESS» RLCA MILL REVIEM DCP BOLT SIZE PROGRRN ND SPECIFIC SRNPLE OF CL» IHOLD-DGMN BOLTS.
1121, 830506 FID 2 T80610 TES ER/C PGCE CHK BOLT SIZEt FILTER UNIT - 39CONNEHTl DCP REVISED AHAQSIS SNOMS BOLTS TO NEET ALLOMABLES AHD DESIGH CRITERIA» RESULT OF THIS EOlt 1096 NB 1020t POSSIBLE
GEHERIC CONCERHt EVEH THOUGH HO OVERSTRESS» RI.CA MILL REVIEM DCP BOLT SIZE PROGRAN At(9 IF DEENEB HECESSARYt A SPECIFICSANPLE OF. CL» I HOLD-DOMH BOLTS»
1121 830506 FI9 3 830610 TES CR HOHE CHK HO BOLT SIZEt FILTER UNIT " 39»CONNEHT» DISCREPANCY BETMEEH HOLD"DOMN BOLT SIZE IH D»A» AHD IH FIELD» DCP REVISE9 AHALYSIS Sto)S B{N.TS TO NEET ALLOMRBLES RNB
DESIGH CRITERIA» RESULT OF THIS EOIt 1096 AND 1020t POSSIBLE GENERIC CONCERHt EVEN THG(hH NO OVE(5TRESS» RLCA MILLREVIEM DCP BOLT SIZE PROGRAM AHD IF DEENED HECESSARYt A SPECIFIC SANPLE OF CL» I HOLD DGMN BOLTS»
1122 830512 OD 0 830512 RLCA OIR RLCA JFN 'ARGE BORE PIPE SUPPORT 10/70SLCONNEHT» DESIGH ANALYSIS CALC HO» S"1281 R»3 DOESH'T ADDRESS SUPPORT FREQUEHCIES IH UNRESTRAINED DIRECTIONS AS REQUIRED BY
LICENSIHG CRITERIA» SINPLIFIED IDVP CALCS SHOMS FREQUEHCIES LESS .THAH 20 HZ» DCP INDICATES'AHALYSIS HAS BEEHREVISED (REV 4) AND IT'DDRESSES AHD SHOMS ALL FREQ» IH UNRESTRAIHED DIRECTION GREATER THAN 20'HZ» IDVP MILL VERIFY.CALC
1122 830512 OD 1 830623 RLCA PER/C TES JFN LARGE BORE PIPE SUPPORT 10/70SLCONNENTl 9 R. FOR SUPPORT 10/70SL (CALC S-1281 R 3) DGESH'T ADDRESS SUPPORT FREQUENCY'lH UNRESTRAIHED DIRECTIOH AS REQUIRED
GEHERIC CONCERN»
BY DCP PROCEDURES» REALISTIC CALCS SHOM FREQ,TO BE ABOVE 20 HZ ALLOMABLE» IDVP DOESN'T CONSIDER THIS EOI TQ'BF, A
83P5)2 '87? 7 8307."6 RLCA PER/C TES JFN LARGE BORE PIPE SUPPORT 10/70SLCONNFHTl D.A. FOR SUYPGRT'(CALC S-.1281 R. 3) DOEStl'T ADDRESS FREQ OR STRESS IH UNRESTRAINED DIRECTIONS PER DCP
PROCEDURES'CPCRITERI(? REQUIRES EITHER FREQ EXCEED 20 HZ OR STRESS DUE TO LOADING.NEET ALLOMABLES DCP PERFORNED FEN TO SNGMh(l. SIFESSFS BELOM nl.LGttABLE, IDVP FEELS EOI ttot A GENERIC CONCFRN.
l1 2 830. 12 09 3 830?"9 TES rf'lt/DE'v PG(E JFtt LARGE BORE plpE SUPPORTCONNF?(T' ~ A. f'R SUPPORT (CALC S"1281 R 3) DOFStt'T ADDRESS FREQ OR STRESS IH UNRESTRAINED Digf{;TIP/l,'cf Cft[TERIA REQUIRES F(THER FREQ EXCEE(l ?0 Hz OR STRESS DUE TO LOADING NEET ALL'OMABL
" N S PER DCP PRQCEDUttE'S,4LL STRESSES BEI OM ALL6MABLE I(VP FEf-:Ls EOI ttar A GENERIC CONCERN
ALLOMABLES PCP PERFORNED FEN TO SKOM .l i~2. '3051 . OD 4 83080 TES CR HONE JFN NG LARGE BOt?E PIPE SUPPOP»T 10/70$ LCONNENTl 9 A FGR SUPPORT (CALC S-1281» R 3) DGEStt'T ADDRESS FREQ OR STRESS IN UNRESTRAINED DIRECTIOtt$ PER DCP PDCP CRITERIA RE(?UIRES EITHER FRED FXCEEI 20 HZ OR STRESS DUE 70 LOADING NEET RLLONABLES,. (?gPALL STRESSFS BELOM AL'GMABLE IDVP FEE'S EOI ttOT.A GENERIC CONCERtl DFVIRTIOH
." REVo 0 LATEST REUo
FILE HOo DATE BASIS REVo DATE BY
'122 0 5 0 =
COtmEHT'o SPACE PROVIDED FOR LATER REVISIONSo
ACTIN POLK
STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
REV 2
830817 D.3-71;
1123 ~ ~ 830513 OD 0 830513 RLCA OIR RLCA RCM INSTRUMENTATION TUBING SUPPORT ~
CONNEHTI DESI6N ANALYSIS ITS-5r'R. 0 ASSUMES SUPPORT MEMBER TO BE A 1202 SECTION D A ITS-5r R 1 PROVIDES AS-BUILT DATA
~~ THAT SNQMS A B 1202 SECTIONo SIMPLIFIED DoAo FOR SUPPORT USER INDICATES STRESS ABOVE ALLO%LE IF CORRECT SECTION
'PROPERTY (J) IS USEDo REPRESENTS SOLE INSTANCE MHERK LICEHSIHO CRITERIA MAY HAUE BKEH KXCEKDKDo
1123 830513. OD 1 830623 RLCA PER/C 'ES RCM IHSTRUNEHTATIOH TUBIHG SUPPORT
~ COMMENT', D,A ITS-5r R 0 ASSUMES SUPPORT MEMBER TO BE A 1202 SECTION REVISIOH 1 PROVIDES AS-BUILT DATA THAT SNNS SUPPLYMEMBER TO RE A B 1202 SECTIOHo MORE REALISTIC CALCS SHOM ALL STRESSES TO BE UNDER ALLOMABLESo IDVP DOESH'T CONSIDER
CQNNENTo DESIGH AHALYSIS ITS 5r Ro 0 ASSUMES SUPPORT MEMBER IO BE A 1202 SECTIOHo R ~ 1 OF CALC PROVIDES AS BUILT DATA THATSHOMS SUPPORT MENBER TO BE B-1202 SECTIOH MORE REALISTIC CALCS SHOM ALL STRESSES TO BE UHDER ALLOMABLES THISEQI HOIES A SOLE IHSTANCEr IDVP DOESH'T COHSIDER THIS A GENERIC COHCERH,
1123 830513 09 3 8 0713 TES CR NONE RCM NO IHSlRUNENTAIION TUBIHG SUPPORT
CONNEHTo DESIGN ANALYSIS ITS 5r. RE 0 ASSUMES SUPPORT MENDER TO BE A 1202 SECTIONS Ro 1 OF CALC PROVIDES AS BUILT DATA IHAT
SHOMS SUPPORT MEMBER TO BE B-1202-SECTION NORE REALISTIC CALCS SHOM ALL STRESSES TO BE UHDER ALLOMABLES. THIS
EOI NOTES A SOLE IHSIANCF IttUP DOFSN'I CONSIDER THIS A GEHERIC COHEStttt 'FRROR CLASS C.
COMMENT'. 9ESIGN AHALYSIS FEM OF CR SLAB USED IO GEHERATE HOSGRI SPECTRA DOESH'T AGREE MITH FIELD VERIFIED LOCATION QF
SUPPPPTING MALLSo DCP REVISED FEN TO AGREE MITH FIELD~ AT CERTAIN FREQUEHCIESt SPECTRA INCREASED BY 15X, DCP
IHDICATES ttO STRUCTURAL NODS RESULTED FROM THIS ERRORo
1124 830514 OD 2 830628 TES ER/R PG LE RDC AUXILIARYBUILDING SPECTRA GENERATIONCONNEHTo DESIGN AHALYSIS FEM OF CR 'SLAB USED,TO GENERATE HOSGRI SPECTRA DOESH'T AGREE MITH FIELD VERIFIED LQCATIQH QF
SUPPORTIHG MALLS. DCP REVISED FEM TO AGREE MITH FIELD AT CERTAIH FREQUEHCIES SPECTRA IHCREASED BY 15X,„„. I QICATES NO. STRUCIURAL NODS RESULTED FRON THIS ERROR
COMMENT: nESIGH ANALYSIS FEN OF CR SLAB FOR HOSGRI SPECTRA DOESN'T AGREE M/FIELD LOCATIOH OF SUPPORTING MALLS. DCP HAS
REVISED IO AGREE M/FIELD. SPECTRA INCREASES NORE THAH 15X AT SOME FREQ IDUP DESIGH VERIFIED'DCP SPECTRA DCP
INDICATES HO STRUClURAL NODS RESULT. PREVIOUSLY AH ERROR CLASS B CLOSED ITEM.
1125 830520 SID 0 830520 RLCA OIR RLCA CHK HVAC CQttPRESSOR CP"35r 36CQMNEHTl CONTROL AND APPLICATION OF NSGRI SPECTRA MAS IDENTIFIED IH IHITIALSAMPLE AS A GEttERIC CmoCERH DCP CAP FORMULATED
TO INCLUDE REVIEM FOR CORRECT HOS6RI SPECTRA IHPUTSo DESIGN ANALYSIS IHIU 3ol it REUo 1 USES INCORRECT AHDUHCmtSERVATIVE SPECTRAo HO OVERSTRESSo
1125 830520 SI D 1 830526 RLCA PER/C TES CHK HUAC COMPRESSOR CP"35r 36COMNEHTo CALC D"HV"3o1"1 REVo 1 USES IHCORRECT AHD INtCOHSERUATIVE SPECTRAo CONTROL AH9 APPLICATIQH OF HOSGRI SPECTRA ID DURING
IHITIALSAMPLE MQRK AS GENERIC COHCERHo DCP CAP FORNULATED TQ IHCLUDE REVIEM FOR CORRECT HOSGRI SPECTRA INPUTSo. THIS ITEM DOES HOT CAUSE OUERSTRESSo
,~
Fll.E NO<
1127'ONMEHTI
FILE HO
1128'OMMEHte
F,ILE NO>
1128COMMENTI
REV 2830817 0.3-72a
REVo 0 LATEST REVe ACTIOH PGRE
DATE BASIS REVI DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
830525 'MD 3 830616 TES CR NONE CHK HO HVAC SUPPLY FANS S-it 2DCP FREQUENCY CALC USED ONLY BEARIHG BLOCK SUPPORT BEAN AHD HOT OTHER FLEX OF FAH SUPPORTING STRUCTUREa FH 'MAYACTUALLY BE LOMER DCP FREQ CALC ACCEPTABLE " SINILIAR TO IHITIALSAMPLE MORK (FAH S"31) DCP BEARING BLOCK SUPPORTBEAN FREQ CALC CORRECTs ORIGIHAL RLCA COHCERH HOT VALID'LOSED ITENi
REV, 0 „, LAlEST REVo ACTION PG1E
DATE BASIS. REV. DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT .
830531 FID 0 830531 RLCA OIR RLCA CHK STATIOH BATTERY RACKS9 A FOR RACKS ASSUMES 1/2'IAMETER A-307 STRUCTURAL BOLTS RLCA FIELD VERIFIED BOLTS TO BE 3/8'F BOLTS THREADEDAT SHEAR LOCATIONS SHEAR STRESS EXCEEDS ALLOMABLES BY 63Xr IF NOT THREADEDt STRESS IS
ACCEPTABLE'EV»
0 LATEST REVo ACTIOH PGEE
DATE BASIS REV, 'ATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
830531 FID 1 830620 RLCA OIR RLCA CHK STATIOH BATTERY RACKSDoAs FOR STATIOH BATTERY RACKS ASSUMES A-307 1/2'lRUCTURAL BOLTS'LCA FIELD VERIFIED BOLTS TO BE 3/8'oDoAa ALSO DDESN'T CONSIDER RESOLVED SHEAR FORCE FOR 3/8'OLT ANALYSIS'lRESSES EXCEED ALLOMABLE IFCORRECT BOI.T SIZE AND SHEAR FORCE IS USED.
REV. 0 LATEST REV o 'CT IOH P GEE
FILE HOo . DATE BASIS REVa DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
MENTS DoAo FOR STATION BATTERY RACKS ASSUMES A-307 1/2'TRUCTURAL BOLTS'LCA FIELD VERIFIED'OLTS TO BE 3/8'.~ "9)A, ALSO DOESH'T CONSIDER RESOLVED SHEAR FORCE FOR 3/8'OLT ANALYSIS'TRESSES EXCEED ALLONBLE IF
CORRECT BDLT SIZE AND SHEAR FORCE IS USED
REV. 0 - LATEST REVo ACTION PGiE
FILE HO. DATE BASIS'EV, DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
COMMENTt BENIGN ANA'SIS FOR STATIOH BATTERY.RACKS (EQPN CALC 9-E-3 4-1) R 0) LISTS DIFFEREHT STRUCTURAL FRAME BOLTS AHD ANCHOR
BOLTS THAN THOSE IH THE FIEL9. ALSO 'AD DISTRIBUTIONS BTMH MEMBERS ARE UNCONSERVATIVE AND lHE RESOLVED SHEAR FORCE-
FPR FRAMf'OLTS MAS NOT COHSIDEREDi RLCA HAS PERFORMED ALTERNATE CALCS THAT SHOU ALL STRESSES NEET ALLOMABLES,
-tres- - --0 --- -6- —--0COMMEHTl SPACED RESERVED'FOR LATER REVISION
1128 0 . 7 0COMMEN t SPACED RESERVED FOR LATER'REVISIOH
8
REVi 0 'AlEST REVo ACTIOH PGKE
FILE NO DATE BASIS REV . DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
1129 830603 OD .. 0 830603 RLCA OIR RLCA JFN LARGE BORE PIPE SUPPORT 56S/3ACOMMENT1 D A INCORRECTLY ANALYZED 1/O'ELD BETMEEH.PIPE LUG AHD SUPPORTIHG STEEL MELD STRESS EXCEEDS ALLONBLE MHEH DIVIDED
BY MELD CROSS SECTIOH 'UPPOR't MODIFIED BY DCP COHFIGURATION QUALIFIED BY CALC NO LOHGER EXISTS IN PLANT. HOGEHERIC CONCERH.
FILE NOe
1129COMMENTS
FILE HQ
1129CONNEHTT
FILE NO.
1129CONNEHTT
REV 2830817 D 3-72b
'I
&TV, 0 ,"
LATEST REV ACT ION POTE
DATE BASIS REV. DATE BY STATUS ORG lES NODS SUBJECT
830603 OD 1 830620 RLCA PER/C TES JFM LARGE BORE PIPE SUPPORT 56S/3A
MELD SlRESS 'CALC USED CONSERVATIVE ASSUNPTIOH FOR NONEHT OF INERTIAo STRESS MEETS ALLOMABLES IF ACCURATE MENEH7 OF
,IHERTIA IS USED AND RESULTANT STRESS IS DIVIDED BY MELD CROSS SECTIOH SUPPORT MODIFIED BY DCP SUPPORT QUALIFIED BY '.
CALC A"103r R5 HO LONGER EXISTS IH PLANT HOT A GENERIC, CONCERNS
REVo 0 LATEST REV. ACTIOH PGXE
9ATE BASIS, REV DATE BY STATUS ORG lES NODS, SUBJECT
830603 OD'
830627 TES ER/C PGXE JFH CARGE BORE PIPE SUPPORT 56S/3A
DoA MADE CONPEHSATING ERRORS ANALYZIHG 1/4 MELD BETWEEN PIPE LUG AND SUPPORTIHG STEEL MELD STRESSES DO NOT EXCEED
ALLO'MABLES. NO GHERIC COHCERH ERROR C.
REV. 0 . - . LATEST REV+ ACTIOH POLE
DATE BASIS REVi DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS 'UBJECT
830603 09 3 830628 TES CR HOHE JFN LARGE BORE PIPE SUPPORT 56S/3A9@AD MADE CONPEHSATIHG ERRORS ANALYZIHG 1/4 MELD BETWEEN PIPE LUG AND SUPPORTING STEELt MELD STRESSES DO NOT EXCEED
ALLOMABLES. HO GHERIC CONCERNS ERROR Co
REVi 0 LATEST REVo AClIOH PG1E
jILE HO DATE BASIS REV, DATE 'Y STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
1130 830603 09 0 830603 RLCA OIR - RLCA PPR . CONPOHENT COOLING MATER LUBE OIL FILTERCONMENTT D,A,'ONCLUDES COOLER NOT QUALIFIED AND NODS ARE REQUIRED, PGtE PH, I FIHAL REPORT STATES IT IS AND NODS HOT HEEDED,
ITR 48 R 0 REQUIRES IDVP TO VERIFY DCP CAP HAS BEEH FULLY INPLENEHTED THE SIGHIFICAHCE OF COHCERN IS THA REQUIRED, CORRECTIVE ACTIOH MAS HOT IMPLEMENTED( RLCA TO EXPAHD REVIEW IH THIS
AREAR'REV.
0 LATEST REVo ACTION PGRE
FILE HOo 'ATE BASIS REV. DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
1130 830603 OD , 1'30618 RLCA PPRR/DEV TES PPR CONPOHEHT COOLING MATER LUBE OIL FILTERCONNEHTl DCP SCHEDULE AHD FIHAL REPORT SNOMED MORK OH THIS ITEH TO'BE'COMPLETE AHD QUALIFIED AFTER 830614
TECHNICAL MEETING DCP SHOWED THE ITEM IHCLUDED OH IHTERNAL IHTERFACE LISTS OF ITEMS FOR ACTIOH, IT IS CLEAR THATREQUIRED ACTION'MOULD HAVE BEEH INPLENEHTEDo DCP COMMITTED TO REVISE THIS SECTIOH OF PHo I FIHAL REPORTS
REVi 0 LATEST REVo ACTIOH POTE
, FILE HOi DATE BASIS REV. DATE BY STATUS ORG TES MODS SUBJECT
1130 830603 OD 2 830627 TES PRR/DEV PGCE PPR COMPOHENT COOLIHG MATER L'UBE OIL FILTERCONNEHTl, PGLE PHi I FIHAL REPORT IHDICATES THIS ITEM QUALIFIED AHD NO MODS,. DESIGH AHALYSIS COHCLUDES THAT IT IS HOT QUALIFIED
DUE TO HIGH NOZZLE LOADS DCP IHTERHAL MEMOS INDICATE ITEN ALREADY BEING TRACKED. PH, I FINAL REPORT IS INCORRECTt'GXE HAS CONMITED TO CORRECT ITo ~
REV"a 0 LATEST REVI ACTIOH PGRE
1130 8i0603 Oii .1 '30650 TES CR NOHE PPR HO COMPONEHT COOLIHG MATER LUBE OIL FILTERCOMMENTS D.h COIICLUDES COOLER NQT QUALIFIED AND NODS ARE REQUIRED. PGXE PH I FINAL REPORT STATES IT IS AHD NODS HOT HEEDED
AFTER 830614 TECHNICAL MEETING DCP SHOWED TNE ITEN IHCLUDED ON IHTERHAL IHTERFACE. LISTS OF ITEMS FOR AC'TIDH Il IS =
CII:~R THAT REOUIRFD ~CTION WOULD HAVF. BEEN IMPLEMENTED, DCP COMMITTED TO REVISE THIS SECTION OF PH, I FINAL REPORT, DF~
FILE HO, DATE BASIS REV. DATE BY STATUS ORG. TES NODS SUBJECT
'131 830606 QD 0 830606 RLCA OIR RLCA JFN LARGE BORE PIPE SUPPORTS 58S/16V AHD 63/26VCONMEHT1 9tA ~ DO HOT EVALUATE SHEAR LUGS AHD ATTACHNEHT MELDS ~ EVALUATIOH REQUIRED FOR CAP ~ IDVP MILL REVIEW REVISED DCP
CALCS AND EVALUATE THE LUGS AHD MELDS BASED ON ORIGINALLOADS'EV
0 LATEST REVo ACTION PGRE
FILE HOi DATE BASIS REVi 'ATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
'131
830606 OD 1 830620 RLCA PPRR/DEV TES JFM LARGE BORE PIPE SUPPORTS 58S/16V AHD 63/26VCOMMENTS DESIGH ANALYSES DOH'T EVALUATE SHEAR LUGS AHD ATTACKMEHT MELDS [CALCS H-1040 R,2 AHD H-359 R.4); THIS IS REQUIRED
BY DCP PROCEDURES'EPARTURE FROM PROCEDURE~ HOT ERRORS STRESSES ARE LOM BY IHSPECTIOHo,
REV. 0 LATEST REVs ACTIOH POTE
~ REV 2'830817 0.3.-72c
F ILE HO GATE BASIS REV. 'ATf BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECTI
1131 830606 09 2 830624 TES PRR/DEV POLE JFN LARGE BORE PIPE SUPPORTS 58S/16V AHD 63/26U-COHMEHTl 9 A. FOR THESE SUPPORTS AHD ASSOCIATED PIPIHG DON'T EVALUATE SHEAR LUGS AND ATTACHMENT MELDS, THIS EVALUATIOH
REQUIRED BY DCP PROCEDURES'EPARTURE FROM PROCEDUREr HOT AH ERRORs STRESSES IH lHESE SHEAR LUGS AND
ATTACNMEHl MELDS„ARE LOM BY IHSPECTIONsREVs 0 ,
'LATEST REUs ACTIOH PGfE
FILE HO. DATE BASIS REU DATE'Y STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
1131 830606 OD , 3 830624 TES CR HOHE JFH LARGE BORE PIPE SUPPORTS 58S/16V AHD 63/26VCOMMENTS 9.A FOR THESE SUPPORTS AND ASSOCIATED PIPIHG DOH'T ENLUATE SHEAR LUGS AHD ATTACHNEHT MELDS THIS EVALUATION
REQUIRED BY DCP PROCEDURES. DEPARTURE FROM PROCEDUREr HOT AH ERROR STRESSES IH THESE SHEAR LUGS AND
AlTACHMEHl MELDS ARE LOM BY IHSPECTIOH, DEVIATIOH,REVs 0 LATEST REU ACTIOH PGIE
FILE NO DATE BASIS "REU'ATE BY STATUS 'RG TES NODS SUBJECT
1132 830606 09 ' 830606 RLCA OIR RLCA RDC AUXILIARYBUILDINGCOMKENTs DCP REPORTED COMPLETION OF AUX BUILDING MEMBER EVALUATIONSs DOES HOT INCLUDE ENLUATIOH OF SLABS FOR IH-PLAHE ~
LOADIHG 'REQUIRED CORRECTIVE ACTIOH MAS NOT FULLY IMPLENEHTEDr YET REPORTED AS COMPLETE RLCA MILL COHTIHUE REVIEWIH CIVIl/STRUCTURAl. AREA.
FILE HO, 9ATE BASIS REV, DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
1132 '30606 OD .1 830618 RLCA PPRR/CI TES RDC AUXILIARYBUILDIHGCOMKFNTl THIS EOI CONTAINS AN INCORRECT STATEMEHT, IT SHOULD READ '„.THIS MODEL MAS REQUIRED TO MORE ACCURATELY
DISlRIBUlE THE LOADS FROM THE ORIGIHAL STICK MODEL . 'LCA RECOMMENDS COKBIHING THIS EOI MllH EOI 1097 AS.AN ERROR CLASS A OP. Bs
REV. 0 LATEST REVs ACTIOH PGRE
FILE HQs DATE BASIS 'REVs DATE BY STATUS ORG TES .NODS 'UBJECT
1132 830606 . 09 2 830625 TES PRR/CI TES RDC AUXILIARYBUILDIHGCONMENTl THIS EOI CONTAINS AN IHCORRECT STATENEHT IT SHOULD READ '..THIS MODEL MAS REQUIRED TO KORE ACCURATELY
DISTRIBUTE THE LOADS FRON THE ORIGIHAL STICK MODEL . 'LCA RECOMNEHDS CONBIHING THIS EOI MITH EOI 1097 AS
AN ERROR CLASS A OR BsREVs '0 '
LATEST REVs ACTIOH PGLE
FILE HOs DATE BASIS REUs DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
1132 830606 09 3 830627 TES CR NONE RDC AUXILIARYBUILDIHGCOMMEHTl DCP REPORTED COMPLETIOH;OF AUX BUILDIHG NEKBER EVALUATIONS DOES NOT INCLUDE ENLUATIOH OF SLABS FOR IH-PLANE LOADIHG
THIS EOI COHTAIHS AH INCORRECT STATEMEHT, IT SHOULD READ '„,THIS MODEL MAS REQUIRED TO MORE ACCURATELY DISTRIBUTETHE LOADS FROM THE ORIGIHAL STICK MODEL'..'LCA RECONKEHDS CONBIHIHG THIS EOI WITH 1097 AS AH ER/AB CLOSED ITEN
REVs '0 LATESl REUs ACTIOH PG!E
FILE NO'AlF. BASIS REV. 9ATF. BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
1133 '30613 . 07r 0 830613 RLCA OIR" RLCA RDF LARGE BORE PIPIHG - ANALYSIS 8-117 REU. 2'OMKEHElVALVE 9003A IH D.A. 8.-117r REV 2 MAS NODELLED WITH 2/3 WEIGHT AT OVERALL NLUE C. OF G. SECT 4 5 6 2 OF, DCP
PROCEDURE P-11 REV. 3 REQUIRES TOTAL UALUE MEIGHT TO BE MODELLED THERE RLCA TO EXAMIHE REV 3 TO CONFIRH STRESSINPACl AND COHlINUE REVIEW OF VALVE NODfLLIHG,
COKMFNTl NLVE 9003A IH 9 A. 8-117r R 2 MAS HODELI.ED WITH 2/3 WEIGHT AT C OF G DCP PROCEDURE REQUIRES TOTAL MEIGHT BE.MODFLLED THERE, RLCA HAS VERIFIED THAT REVISED DCP ANALYSIS CORRECTLY MODELS VALVE AND ACCELERATIOHS MEETALI.G!lAPLESs EOI 1133 HAS BEEN COMBINf9 INTO THIS FILE
COMKEHTs DsAs 8 117t Rs 'MODELLED 2/3 OF'LVE WEIGHT OF Cs OF Gs DCP PROCEDURES REQUIRES TOTAL VALUE WEIGHT s EOI 1106HAS BEEN COMBINED WITH THIS FILEs DCP HAS RFVISED AHALYSISs RLCA HAS UERIFIED REUISED ANALYSIS CORRECTLY MODELSVALVE 9003A AND SHOWS ACCELERATIONS TO NEET ALLOMABLESs
113 830613 ,OD 3 830706 TES CR HONE RDF NO LARGE BORE PIPING - ANALYSIS 8-117 REV, 2CONMENTs 9.A. 8-11> R "2 MODELLED 2/3 OF NLVE WEIGHT OF C OF G 9CP PROCEDURES REQUIRES TOTAL 'VALVE MEIGHT EOI 1106
HAS BEEN COMBINED WITH THIS FILEs DCP HAS REUISED AHALYSIS. RLCA HAS VERIFIED REVISED ANALYSIS CORREClLY NODELSN! VF 90C3A AND SHOWS ACCFLERATIONS TO Nffl'L(.OMABLfS ERROR CLASS C
0FILE HO»
1134 .,
CONNEHTt
REV» 0 LATEST REV» ACTIOH PGLED. 3-72d
DATE BASIS REV DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
830615 OD 0 830615 RLCA OIR RLCA RCM HVAC DUCT AHD DUCT SUPPORTS
RLCA HAS REVIEMED 3 D A THAT USED STRUDL-II IN 2 OF THE 3F LOADING RESULTED IH HODAL FREQUEHCY HOT
CORRESPONDING TO FIRST NODE» OHE DIRECTIONAL LOADIHG USED WITH RAYLEIGH-RITZ XETHOD HAY HOT ACCURATELY
ESTABLISH FIRST %DE FREQUENCY. l'OSSIBLE GENERIC CONCERN .
REV» 0 LATEST REV» ACTIOH PGRE
FILE NO, DATE 'ASIS REV, DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS SUBJECT
1135 830616 OD 0 830616 RLCA OIR RLCA RDF LARGE BORE PIP IHG AHALYSIS 2-120
CO}}KENTl VALVES LCV-113 AHD 115 IN D A 2"120 REV 0 MERE NODELLED WITH VALVE BODY WEIGHT OF 69 LBS AHD OPERATOR WEIGHT OF
ll9 LBS» RLCA REVIEW SHOMED MEIGHTS TO BE APPROXINATELY 125 LBS AND 130 LBS RESPECTIVELY»
83jbib OD I 83P629 RLCA PER jC TES RDF LARGE BORE PIPING ANALYSIS 2-120
CONMEHT: D,A 2-120'.P NODELLED VALVE BODY MEIG}}T OF 69 LBS AND OPERATOR MEIGHT OF 119IED REVISED DCP AHNALYSISNCORRECT'LYRLCA REVIEW SHQ'WED MfIGHTS TQ Bf 125 AHD 130 LBS) Rf$PECTIVELY» RLCA HAS VERIFIED REVISED DCP AHA
CONNEHTt DiA APPLIED SIF OF 1 0 AT PIPE/REGENERATIVE HX INTERFACE RLCA DETERNINED 'SIF OF lo9 REQUIRED( PIPE STRESSES EXCEED
ALLOMARLE IF CORRECT SIF USED'tA ~ RERUH MITH USING ACTUAL SPECTRAL STRESSFS NEET ALLOMABLESo DCP CONNITTED TO
REVIEM AlL LoRe DESIGH CLASS ! ANALYSES FOR SIFTS
1l39 830726 OD 0 830726 RLCA OIR RLCA RC(t STAii BORE SUPPORT 2159/2CONNEHT' A FREQUENCY CALO IH RESTRAIHED DIRECTION PERFORNED RY CONPARING CONPUTED SUPPORT DEFLECTIOH TO CONSERVATIVE,
,STANDARD f<FFLECTIOH CALC ERRONEOUSLY CONPAREDi RESUlTS IH FREQ LESS THAN 20 HZ REVISED AHALYSIS HAS REEH
REPORTED TO SHOM CRITERIA HAS REEH NET,
. 1139 i)3O7'26 "Or . I a3Of)O3 RiCA PN/T TES RCM SNAii BORE SUIPORT 2159/2CONNEHTl D A. FREQUENCY CALC IN RESTRAINED DIRECTIOH RASED ON CONPUTIHG SUPPORT DEFLECTIOH AND CONPARIHG TO CONSERVATIVE
STAHDARD. DEFlECTION ERROHEOUSLY CONPARED RESULTING IH FREON LESS THAH 20 HZ DCP REVISED ANALYSIS AND RLCAVERIFIED THAI FREQ EXCEEDS 20 HZ AS-RUILT SUPPORT NEET LICEHSING CRITERIA.
i139 . 830726 OD 2 830809 TES ER/C PGaE RCM SHALL RORE SUPPORT 2159/2CONNEHfl D A. FREQUEHCY CALC IH RESTRAIHED DIRECTION RASED OH CONPUTING SUPPORT DEFLECTIOH AND CONPARING TO CONSERVATIVE,
STANDARf! DEFLECTIOH ERRONEOUSLY CONPARED RESULTIHG IH FREQ LESS THAN 20 HZ, DCP REVISED ANALYSIS AHD RLCAVERIFIEf! THAT,.FREQ EXCEEDS 20 HZ AS-BUILT SUPPORT NEET LICEHSIHG CRITERIA,
(139 . 830726 OD 3 830809 TES CR HOttE RCM HO SMALL BORE SUPPORT 2159/2fONNENTl D.A. FREQUEHCY CALC IH RESTRAINED DIRECTIOH BASED ON CONPUTING SUPPORT DEFLECTIOH AHD CONPARIHG TO CONSERVATIVE
STAHDARfi. DEFLECTION ERRONEOUSLY CONPARED RESULTIHG IH FREQ, LESS THAN 20 HZ, DCP REVISED ANALYSIS AND RLCAVFRIFIED THAT FRFQ, EXCEFDS 20 HZ AS-BUIIT SUPPORT NEET LICEHSIHG CRITERIA ERROR CLASS C,
1140 830729 Ol> 0 830729 RLCA OIR . RLCA,ICT FIRE PUNP - CAP AHALYSIS SQE"7 Ii REV. 0CONNEHT: DCP ANALYSIS DOESH'T EXANINE I!ISCHARGE HOZZl.E FLANGED JOINT, IDVP REVIEM SHOMS CONRINATION OF SEISNIC PIPIHG NOZZLE
LOADS AHf! DESIGH PRESSURE CAUSE FlAHGE ROLf STRESS TO EXCEED ALLOMARLE CRITERIA (ASNE SECT III CL III M/HOSGi(lCRITERIA) .
LOADS AND I!ESIGN PRESSURE CAUSE FLANGE BOLT STRESS TO EXCEED ALLOMABLE CRITERIA (ASNE SECT Ills CL III M/HOSGRI
CRIT'�
)APPI.)CA'flOH OF APPROP CODE AND CALCS SHAM ALL S'TRESSES BELOM ALLOMABLE AS-BUILT DOESH'T NEET POTE Plf'ING SPECIFICATIOH
I (4t 8 0802 OtI 0 83080'' RL<,'A 0th RLCA Rf7 SNAii AHD LARGE BORE PIPIHGCONNENfl f>CP PROCEDURE P"11i R 4 DOES''I INCL(IDE LINES 26 AHD 1040 THRU 1043 HIGH ENERGY LIHES FOR POSTUlATED RREAK lOCATIOH
REVIEM. SINCE P-11 DIDtt'T IDENTIFY LIHES AS H E.i POSTULATED BREAK LOCATIOHS NAY NOT HAVE BEEH-DENTIFIED'142
830809 OD 0 830809 RLCA OIR RLCA RCM SHALL BORE SUPPORT SI "GR LIHE 3900CONNENTl ANCHOR S1-8R OH LINE 3900 HOT CONSIDERED RY D A. FOR EFFECTS. OF VARIOUS LOADIIHG COHDITIOHS OH OTHER DESIGH CLASS I
SUPPORTS SUPPORT LOCATED ON HOH-CL, I PIPIttG, CONSIDERATIOH OF VARIOUS LOADING CONDITIOHS REQUIRED RY DCN N-9, TECHHICACONCERH HAS APPARENTLY REEH ELIHIHATED SIHCE AHCHOR HAS BEEH REPLACED MITH A GRAVITY SUPPORTS
REV 1
830817 0 3-77 .
~
~REUs 0 LATEST REVA" ACTIOH POTE
FILE HOs DATE BASIS REVD DATE BY STATUS ORG TES NODS 'SUBJECT
7001 821011 OAR 0 821011 RFR OIR RFR NR 'UXND FH BUILDING INAC SYSTEM
CMEHTA AS FAR AS COULD BE DETERNIHED) THERE IS HO EVIDENCE OF AH IHDEPEHBKHT REVIEM OF AUX NN FH BUILDIHG HVAC PRENMRR c-
LOSS CALC PERFORMED BY GEZD THIS ITEH IS OUTSIDE CURREHT SUKC SAMPLE FOR IDVP PNSE 2s
7001 821011 - QAR 1 830202 TES PRR/CI TES NR AUX AN FH BUILDING HVAC SYSTEM
CONIKHTA BASED UPOH ADDITIONAL.IHFORNATIOH PROVIDED BY PG'I (DCVP-TES-6h7) NI 821215 NN REVIEMED BY SMECS TIK ONCEIN NBRESSED
BY THIS FILE NS BEEH RESOLUEDA FILE TO BE CLOSEDD
7001 821011 'OAR 2 830202 TES CR HNE NAR HO AUX AHD FH BUILDING HVAC SYSTEM
CONMEHTI AS FAR AS COULD BE DETERMINED'D THERE IS HO EUIDEHCE OF AH INDEPENDENT REVIEM OF AUX AN FH BLDG INAC'PRESSURE LOSS CALC
PERFORMED BY GEZ THIS ITEN 18 OUITSIDE CURRENT %EC MPLE FOR llWP PH ll BASED UPN ADD INFO INDED BY PGg IDCUP-
18"bht? OIL 82$ 2l5 I KVINKD BlT 5MECt THE COCKRN AD@?E8SKD BY TIIT8 FILE HA8 DKH 8ATISFACTNILY RESOLVEDD FILE CLOSED»
COMMENTS SIIEC TO REVIEM DCP CONPLETIOH SHEET SIGNED 830720) At)D PROVIDE A RECONNEHDATIOH FOR FUTURE DISPOSITIOH
7002 82101L OAR 6 830802 TES CR AOkE NAR HO COHTAIkMEHT JET INPIHGEMEHTCOMMENT', ,)ff IMPINGEMEHT INSIDE COHTRIHMENT ANALYZED BY DCP AHD VERIFIED BY IDUP AS PART OF ADDITIOHAL UERIFICATIOH PROGRAM,
ISSUAt)CE OF ITR-48 REPORTS SUCCESSFUL COMPLETIOH OF 'ADDITIONAL SAMPLE'OVERIHG JET IMPIHGEtIEHT EFFORTS OF
POSTULATFD PIPE RUPTURES INSIDE COHTAIHMEHT DEFINED BY ITR"34) SECTIOH 6 PREVIOUSLY AH ER/AB CLOSED ITEN
1
7003 821123 OAR 0 . 821123 RFR OIR RFRCONNEHTI JUSTIFICATIOH THAT EDS COHCURS MITH THE PGIE RESOLUTIREVIEM OF THE COHTAINKHT ISOLATION SYSTEM MAS HOT
, REVISE EHUIRMIEHTAL QUALIFICATIOH FILES AN INSTRUMENT SCHEMATIC 102036 TO REFLECT CLs II STATUSs
8064, 830215 DN & 830407 TES CR HONE RRB HO AFM SYS COMPONENTS .PON 110t 111t 113r 1 115CONMEHTI HO DOCUMENTATION THAT POM'S LISTED ARE ENVIROHMEHTALLYQUALIFIEDR POKE RESD AHD CONPD SNTP DATED 8303220 DESIGN
DONEHTS IMPROPERLY REPORTED CLASSIFICATIOH OF PON'S AS S-Rs POTE TO REVISE EHVIRONNEHTAL QUALIFICATION FILES AHD
INSTRUMENT SCHEMATIC 102036 TO REFLECT CLs II STATUSS DEVIATIOHD
8M5 830608 FID 0 830608 SMEC OIR SMEC LCH JET IMPIHGENEHT REVIEMCONBITi POSTDATED BRM ON FEEDNTER L1HE HOD 555 MAY IMPINGE UPON HORIZONTAL PORTION OF NAIH STEAN LIHE HOs 2270 CONDUIT
l5-582 NISIDEHTIFIED AND NAY BE MITHIN ZINE OF IHFLUEHCE OF RCP OUTLETD LINE 24 MAY IMPINGE UPOH CONDUIT KX-4280RUPTNE OF LETDONI LIRE 24 NAY IMPINGE UPON TMO OF THE VERTICAL SUPPORTS FOR EXCESS LETDOMN LINE 24.
80&5 830608 FID 1 830608 SMEC PPRR/OIP TES LCH JET INPINGBIENT REVIEMCOMMENT'0 SAFETY EVALUATION SHOULD BE PERFNNED BY THE DCP TO DETERMINE MHETHER IDEHTIFIED TARGETS ARE HEEDED TO SAFELY SMUTDOMN
THE PLANT UHDER THE CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED MITH THE POSTULATED PIPE BREAKS OR RUPTURESs
'D65
030600 FIR 2 030666 TER PRR/DIP PSIE LCR 'ET IRPIRSERERT RESTER
CONMBITo. FOUR ITEMS OF CNCERH HAVE BEEH IDENTIFIED RESULTIHG FROM DATA OBTAIHED DURIHG THE IDVP 830524-26 SITE VERIFICATIONDDCP TO PERFORM A SAFETY EVALUATION TO RESOLVE THE ITENSD
80&5, 830608 F ID 3 830621 TES OIR SMEC LCN JET IMPIHGEMEHT RE'VIEM
COMNENTI'MEC TO REVIEM THE DCP CONPLETIOH SHEET SIGHED 830617 AHD PROUIDE A RECOINEHDATION FOR FUTURE DISPOSITIOH.
8065OMMEHTs
8065OMMEHTs
8065-COMMENTI
830608 F ID 4 830715 SMEC PPRR/CI TES LCH JET IMPINGENEHT REUIEM
DGP EVALUATED FOUR JET IMPINGEMENT IHTERACTIOH M/S-R TARGETSs ALL FOUR IHTERACTIONS ARE CONCLUDED TO IMPAIR HO ESSENTIAL
FUNCTIONS REQUIRED TO MITIGATE CONSEQUENCES OF POSTULATED HELB'S AND TO SAFELY SHUTDOMN 'PLANT
CONSIDERED ISOLATED INSTAHCES AND HOT INDICATIVE OF AHY GENERIC DIFFICIENCY IN DCP JET IMPINGEMEHT FIELD REUIEMs
DCP EVALUATED FOUR JEl'MPIHGENENT IHTERACTION M/S-R TARGETS. ALL FOUR IHTERACTIONS ARE CONCLUDED TO IMPAIR HO ESSENTIAL
FUNCTIONS REQUIRED TO MITIGATE.CONSEOUEHCES OF POSTULATED HELB'S AND TO SAFELY SNUTDOMN PLAHT FOUR DISCREPANCIES ARE
CONSIDERE9 ISOLATED INSTANCES AHD NOT IHDICATIVE OF ANY GENERIC DIFFICIEHCY IH DCP JET IMPIHGENEHT FIELD REVIEMs
830608 F ID . 6 830720 TES CR HONE LCH HO JET INPIHGEMEHT REVIEMDCP EVALUATED FOUR JET IMPINGEMENT IHTERACTIOH M/S-R TARGETSs ALL FOUR INTERACTIOHS ARE COHCLUBED TO IMPAIR HO ESSEHTIALFUNCTIONS REQU1RED.TO MITIGATE CONSEQUENCES OF POSTULATED NELB'S AND TO SAFELY SMUTDOMH PLAHT. FOUR DISCREPAHCIES ARE
CONSIDERED ISOLATED INSTANCES AND HOT INDICATIVE OF ANY GENERIC DIFFICIEHCY IH DCP JET INPIHGNENT FIELD REUIEM CI
for PGandE Corrective Action'evelopmentof the Service-Related Con-
tractor List for Non-Seismic Design
Work Performed for DCNPP-1 Prior . toJune 1, 1978
Verification of Design Analysis Hosgri
Spectra
PGandE-Westinghouse Seismic InterfaceReview
PipingSoils - Intake StructureVerification of the Pressure, Tempera-
ture, Humidity, and Submergence Envi"ronments used for Safety-Related Equip-ment Specifications Outside Containment
for Auxiliary Feedwater System and CRVP,
System
IDVPFINAL
E. 1-1 REV 1
830805
->s-TELEDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES
E.1 ITRs In Numerical Sequence (Continued)
REV ISSUEITR NO. DATE
15 0 821210
16 0 821208
17 0 821214
18 1 830524
19 0 .821216
20 2 830725
21 1 830503
22 2 830725
23 1 830527
ISSUEDBY
RLCA
RLCA
RLCA
SWEC
SWEC
SWEC
SWEC
SWEC
SWEC
TITLE
HVAC Duct and Supports Report
Soils - Outdoor Water Storage Tanks
Piping - Additional Samples
Verification of the Fire ProtectionProvided for, Auxiliary Feedwater System
Control Room Ventilation and Pressuri-zation System Safety-Related Portion ofthe 4160V Electric System
Verification of the Post-LOCA Portionof the Radiation Environments used forSafety-Related Equipment SpecificationOutside Containment for Auxiliary Feed-
water System and, Control Room Venti la-tion and Pressurization System
Verification of the Mechanical/Nuclear
Design of the Control Room Ventilat'.onand Pressurization
System'erificationof the Effects of High
Energy Line Cracks and Moderate Energy
Line Breaks for Auxiliary Feedwater
System and Control Room Ventilation and
Pressurization System
Verification of the Mechanical/Nuclear
Portion of the Auxiliary Feedwater
System
Verification of High Energy Line Break
and Internally Generated Missile Review
Outside Containment for Auxiliary Feed-
water System and,Control Room Ventila-tion and Pressurization System
IDVPFINAL
E.1-2 REV 2830805
E.l ITRs In Numerical Sequence (Continued)
)0 TELEDYNE .
ENGINEERINQ SERVICES
REV . ISSUEITR NO. DATE
ISSUEOBY TITLE
24 1 830504
25 1 '30429
26 . 1 830502
27 2 830725
28 2 830725
35 '0 830401
36 . 1 830620
37 0 830223
38 2 830620
39 . 0 830225
29 0 820117
30'
830112
31 - 1 830804
32 1 830401
33 1 830428
34 1 830324 =
SWEC
SWEC
SWEC
SWEC
SWEC
SWEC
RLCA
RLCA
RLCA
RLCA
SWEC
RLCA
I
SWEC
RLCA
SWEC
RLCA
Ver ification of the 4160V Safety-Related Electrical Oistribution System
Verification of the Auxiliary Feedwater
System Electrical Oesign
Verification of the Control Room Venti-lation and Pressurization System Elec-.
trical Oesign
Verification of the Instrument and Con-
trol Oesign of the Auxiliary Feedwater
System
Verification of the Instrument and Con-
trol Oesign of the Control Room Ventil-ation and Pressurization System
Oesign Chain - Initial Samples
Small Bore Piping Report
HVAC Components
Pumps
Electrical Equipment AnalysisIndependent Oesign Verification of OCP
Efforts by SWEC
Independent Oesign Verification Program
Verification Plan for OCP ActivitiesFinal Report on Construction gualityAssurance .Evaluation of G.F. AtkinsonValves
Final Report on Construction equalityAssurance Evaluation of Wismer and,
Becker
Soils - Intake Structure BearingCapacity and Lateral Earth. Pressure
IOVPFINAL
E. 1-3 REV 3830816
E.1 ITRs In Numerical Sequence (Continued)
s< TELEDYNEENGINEERINQ SERVICES
REV ISSUEITR NO. DATE
ISSUEDBY TITLE
40 0 830309
41 0 830419
42'
830415
45 0 830517
46 '0 830627
47 " 0 . 830627
48 0 '30727
49 0 830623
50 '0 830722
51
43 . 0 830414
44 0'30415
* RLCA
RFR
RFRh
RLCA
RLCA
SWEC
SWEC
SWEC
SWEC
SWEC
TES
TES
Soils Report - -Intake SlidingResistance.,Corrective Action Program and Design
Office VerificationR.F. Reedy, Inc., Independent DesignVerification Program Phase. II Review
'nd Audit of PGandE and Design Consul-tants for DCNPP-1
Heat Exchangers
Shake Table Test Mounting Class,lEElectrical EquipmentAdditional Verification of Redundancy
of Equipment and „Power ~ Supplies inShared Safety-Related Systems
Additional Verification of Selection ofSystem Design Pressure and Temperatureand Differential Pressure Across Power-
Operated Valves
Additional Verification of Envir'on-
mental Consequences of Postulated PipeRuptures Outside of ContainmentAdditional Verification of Jet Impinge-ment Effects of Postulated Pipe *
Ruptures Inside Containment
Additional Verification of Circuit Sep
aration and Single Failure Review ofSafety-Related Electrical EquipmentContainment Annulus Structure VerticalSeismic EvaluationCorrective Action — Containment Annulus
IDVPFINAL
E.1-4 REV 3830811
E.l ITRs In Numerical Sequence (Continued)
>s-TELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES
REV ISSUEITR NO. DATE
~ ISSUEDBY TITLE
52
53
54
55
56
5.7
Replaced by ITR-68
Replaced by ITR-68
RLCA
RLCA
RLCA
0 830801 RLCA
6
58' 830808, RLCA
59
60
RLCA
RLCA
'162
63
RLCA
Combined with ITR-60
RLCA
,. 64 Combiyed with ITR-63
65"'
RLCA
66 Combined with ITR-63
67 = 0 830812 RLCA
. 68 'LCA
Correcti ve Action Containment Bui 1 dingCorrective Action Auxiliary Building .
Corrective Action Turbine BuildingReview of DCP Activities Fuel Handling
BuildingVerification of DCP Activities IntakeStructureCorrective Action Large Pipe StressCorrective Action Large and Small Bore
American Institute of Steel ConstructionAmerican Iron and Steel InstituteApplicable Licensing Document Index
Applied Nucleonics IncorporatedAuthorized Nuclear InspectorAmerican Nuclear SocietyAmerican National Standards Institut'eAmerican Society of Mechanical Engineers
Auxiliary Salt Water (Pump)
American Water Works Association'RS/JohnA. Blume and Associates, Engineers
-Bechtel Power CorporationCorrective. Action Program
Component Cooling Water (System)
. Closed Item
Certified Material Test Report
Construction quality Assurance
Completion ReportContro,l Room Ventilation and Pressurization (System) „
Design Criteria Memorandum
Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power PlantDiablo Canyon Project (PGandE and BPC).
Double Design Earthquake
Design Earthquake
Devi ationDFOT
Dt10
DOP .
DOV
EDS
IDVPFINAL
Diesel Fuel Oil TransferDesign Methodology DeficiencyDesignated Other PartiesDesign Office VerificationEDS Nuclear, Inc.
F. 1-1 REV 1
830805
EES
EOI
ER
ER/A
ER/8
ER/C
ER/0
, ER/AB
FCV
F ID
- FOT
FSAR
FT
GEZ
GFA
GTAM
HELB
HELC
HLA
HVAC
18(C'CD
IDVP~ IEEE
IGM
ITP
ITR
LCV
. LOCA
MAFW
MELB
MS
NCR
NDE
',IDVPFINAL
Cygna Energy
Services)Error or. Open
Error Report
Error Class A
Error Class B
Error Class C
Item
Error Class D
Error Class A or Class B
Flow Control Valve
Field. Inspection DeficiencyFuel Oil Transfer (Pump)
Final Safety Analysis Report
Flow TransmitterGarretson-Elmendorf-Zinov
Guy F. Atkinson Co.
Gas Tungsten Arc Welding
High Energy Line Break
High Energy Line Crack
Harding Lawson Associates
Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (System)
Instrumentation & ControlIndependent Calculation DeficiencyIndependent Design Verification Program
Institute of Electronic Im Electrical Engineers'Internally Generated MissileInternal Technical Program (of the DCP)
Interim Technical Report
Level Control ValveLoss-of-Coolant AccidentMotor Driven Auxiliary Feedwater (Pump)
Moderate Energy Line Break
Main Steam
Nonconformance ReportNon-Destructive Examination
F.1-2 REV 1
830805
sr-TELEDYNEENGINEERINQ SERVlCES
Services, (formerly, Earthquake Engineering
V
,4
NEMA
NFPA
NPSH
NPSHa
NQAM
'RCNRR
NSC
NSSS
00
OIP
OIR
OWST
P IP" R
PGandE
PUP
PPRR
PRAP
PRR
P'RC
QA
QAP
QAR
RCS
RFR
RHR
RLCA
RRA
SAT
S IFPR
SMAW
SWEC
SWSQAP
eview
urance Pro-
National Electrical Manufacturing Associ'ationNational Fire Protection AssociationNet Positive Suction Head
Net Positive Suction Head availableNuclear Quality Assurance Manual (Bechtel)Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Nuclear Reactor RegulationNuclear Service Corp.
Nuclear Steam Supply System
Other DeficiencyOpen Item Transferred to PGandE
Open Item Report
Outdoor, Water Storage Tanks
Project Engineering Instructions (DCP),
Potential Error ReportPacific Gas and Electric Company
Program Management Plan
Potential Program Resolution ReportProbabilistic Risk Assessment Programs
Program Resolution ReportPlant Staff Review Comittee (PGandE)
